Loading...
06-09-04U KALISPELL CITY PLANNING BOARD & ZONING COMMISSION MINUTES OF REGULAR MEETING JUNE 9, 2004 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: Rick Hull, Jim Atkinson, George Taylor, John Hinchey, Sue Ellyn Anderson and Timothy Norton. Jean Johnson was absent. Narda Wilson represented the Tri-City Planning Office. There were approximately 15 people in the audience. APPROVAL OF MINUTES Atkinson moved and Anderson seconded to approve the minutes of the Kalispell City Planning Board and Zoning Commission regular meeting of May 11, 2004. The motion passed unanimously on a roll call vote. HEAR THE PUBLIC No one wished to speak. PRICE INITIAL ZONING A request by Les and Barbara Price for an initial zoning UPON ANNEXATION designation of B-1, Neighborhood Buffer District, on about REQUEST 1/2 of an acre located on the west side of Meridian Road, south of Center Street, upon annexation to the City of Kalispell. STAFF REPORT Narda Wilson, with the Tri-City Planning Office, gave a KA-04-8 presentation of Staff Report KA-04-8, a request by Les and Barbara Price for an initial zoning designation of B-1, Neighborhood Buffer District, on almost 1/2 of an acre located on the west side of Meridian Road, south of Center Street, upon annexation to the City of Kalispell. Wilson explained that the property is located on the west side of Meridian, south of. Center Street, currently hand ais zoned R-5 in the county, with a single family -home on the property now. She said the owners are requesting annexation and zoning in order to convert the property to an office/business type use, or perhaps multi -family use. There is a small garage that would have to be removed in order to convert the property to a business use for parking. Wilson stated that the growth policy designates this area as mixed use, with low impact -type commercial uses, ,apartments, etc., that this proposal is clearly consistent. with the mixed use definition and is compatible with other uses in the area with offices to the north and the east, and some retail. She also stated there are significant traffic jproblems along Meridian Road, but the B-1 zone is. intended to, generate minimum traffic.in an area. She said, the staff recommends adoption of the staff report and that the zoning be B-1 upon annexation. Kalispell City Planning Board Minutes of the meeting of June 9, 2004 Page 1 of 18 PUBLIC HEARING The public hearing was opened to those who wished to speak on the issue. APPLICANT/AGENCIES Barb Price, 1340 4th Avenue East, owner and developer, stated that everything is professional retail around the property. They plan to do one or two low-key professional offices in the front, and might consider two to four nice units in the back of the property if there is room. She said they would like to leave as many trees as possible and provide adequate parking on the property. PUBLIC COMMENT No one wished to speak and the public hearing was closed. MOTION Atkinson moved and Hinchey seconded to adopt staff report KA-04-8 as findings of fact and, based on these findings, recommend to the Kalispell City Council that the zoning for this property be B-1, Neighborhood Buffer District, on almost 1/2 of an acre upon annexation to the City of Kalispell. BOARD DISCUSSION There was no discussion. ROLL CALL The motion passed unanimously on a roll call vote. BURCH CONDITIONAL USE A request by Arthur and Susan Burch for a conditional use PERMIT REQUEST permit to allow an accessory dwelling on property zoned R-4 at 835 First Avenue East in Kalispell. STAFF REPORT Narda Wilson, with the Tri-City Planning Office, gave a KCU-04-7 presentation of Staff Report KCU-04-7, a request by Arthur and Susan Burch fora conditional use permit to allow an accessory dwelling on property zoned R-4 at 835 First Avenue East in Kalispell. Wilson explained the project and stated that it is in the core area of town, on the east side, between 8th and 9th Streets East; there is currently a single family home on the property, which is a beautiful old home listed on the historic registry. She said the property is three 25-foot lots, or a lot and a half, and the owner wants to build an accessory dwelling near the rear of the property; the R-4 zone allows this with a CUP. Wilson explained that the criteria for an accessory dwelling include that it can't be more than 1000 square feet in size, and may or may not include a basement; a finished basement must still bring the square footage to under 1000 square feet. She said the Burch's are proposing a building of 400 square feet. The accessory building must also conform to the setbacks of the principal structure, which are 10 feet in the rear, 15 in the front, and 5 on the sides, which this does, and an accessory dwelling may only be leased or rented as a separate residence if the property owners live on the property, which they will. It also can not be subdivided and sold as a separate property. Kalispell City Planning Board Minutes of the meeting of June 9, 2004 Page 2 of 18 Wilson said this project makes sense from a planning and infill perspective, there is a lot of room to do this project, and that staff recommends adoption of the staff report subject to the three listed conditions. In response to a question by the Board, she said the single stall garage will be used for parking, as it is now. Hull stated that he was surprised when he saw this, because of what is going on now in Missoula. He asked if it met the standards for an accessory dwelling. Wilson said that it does meet the standards, and the fact that this is a larger lot than most others in town makes this project work. PUBLIC HEARING The public hearing was opened to those who wished to speak on the issue. APPLICANTS/AGENCIES Susie Burch, 835 1st Avenue East, stated that they want to build a small single level cottage in their backyard, which would match the style of their home, and they don't need to cut any trees down. She and her husband want to build a cottage for her parents to live in and they understand the limitations on the CUP; they have spoken to most of their neighbors and they have had a positive response. Hinchey asked about the amount of off-street parking; Burch said that one car uses the garage and there is another garage on the north side of the house and a long driveway, so there is quite a bit of room for off street parking. PUBLIC COMMENT No one wished to speak and the public hearing was closed. MOTION Norton moved and Anderson seconded to adopt staff report KCU-04-7 as findings of fact and, based on these findings, recommend to the Kalispell City Council that a conditional use permit be issued to Arthur and Susan Burch to construct an accessory dwelling on property zoned R-4, Two Family Residential, subject to the three listed conditions. BOARD DISCUSSION Norton stated that if this was denied tonight, the Burch's could do a duplex instead, since the property is zoned for that. Hinchey stated that he used to work with Mr. Burch, he is a master craftsman and he will do a great job on this project. ROLL CALL The motion passed unanimously on a roll call vote. Kalispell City Planning Board Minutes of the meeting of June 9, 2004 Page 3 of 18 KNOLL INITIAL ZONING A request by Tim Knoll for an initial zoning designation of R- UPON ANNEXATION 4, Two Family Residential on one acre located on the east REQUEST side of Denver Avenue, north of Bluestone, upon annexation to the City of Kalispell. STAFF REPORT KA-04-10 Narda Wilson, with the Tri-City Planning Office, gave Staff Report KA-04-10, a request for an initial zoning designation of R-4, Two Family Residential on one acre located on the east side of Denver Avenue, north of Bluestone, upon annexation to the City of Kalispell. Wilson showed a site plan and explained the project. She stated that we've seen a lot of activity in this area lately, and this is a remainder parcel from the Ashley Meadows Subdivision, which is R-4 immediately to the west. This was one of the conditions of approval for Ashley Meadows to be annexed, so that it does not create an island within the City; it is here as an administrative function more than anything else. She said it is consistent with the zoning that surrounds it and she does not believe the owner has any plans to subdivide now; there is an onsite sewerage treatment system that he can use until there is a problem with it. Wilson stated the staff is recommending R-4 zoning because the subdivision is zoned R-4. Atkinson asked about the size of the parcel and the potential for subdivision. Wilson stated it is an acre, with the house almost squarely in the middle of the property, so they might get one additional lot if they decide to subdivide. PUBLIC HEARING The public hearing was opened to those who wished to speak on the issue. APPLICANTS/AGENCIES The applicants were not available. PUBLIC COMMENT No one wished to speak and the public hearing was closed. MOTION Anderson moved and Hinchey seconded to adopt Staff Report KA-04-10 as findings of fact and, based on these findings, recommend to the Kalispell City Council that the initial zoning for one acre of land be R-4, Two Family Residential upon annexation to the City of Kalispell, subject to the listed conditions. BOARD DISCUSSION Norton stated that since the property was almost an acre, it does have the potential for about 7 lots, if the house were to be removed. Kalispell City Planning Board Minutes of the meeting of June 9, 2004 Page 4 of 18 Wilson stated they are limited by the frontage they could attain and by lot width and layout. She said that practically, she is not sure what could happen if the house were removed. ROLL CALL The motion passed unanimously on a roll call vote. PURDY INITIAL ZONING A request by Russell Purdy for an initial zoning designation UPON ANNEXATION of R-2, Single Family Residential with a Planned Unit REQUEST Development overlay on approximately 30.77 acres located on the southwest corner of Three Mile Drive and Stillwater Road upon annexation to the City of Kalispell. BOWSER CREEK ESTATES A request for preliminary plat approval of Bowser Creek PRELIMINARY PLAT Estates, a 98 lot mixed use subdivision on 30.77 acres with a APPROVAL REQUEST zoning designation of R-2/PUD upon annexation to the City of Kalispell. STAFF REPORTS KA-04-11, Narda Wilson, with the Tri-City Planning Office, gave a KPUD-04-5 AND KPP-04-8 presentation of Staff Reports KA-04-11 and KPUD-04-5, a request for an initial zoning designation of R-2, Single Family Residential with a Planned Unit Development overlay on 30.77 acres located on the southwest corner of Three Mile Drive and Stillwater Road upon annexation to the City of Kalispell, and KPP-04-8, a request for preliminary plat approval of a 98-lot mixed use subdivision on approximately 30.77 acres. Wilson showed a large preliminary plat and explained the project in detail. She said it is located on the southwest corner of Three Mile and Stillwater Road and that this proposal was before the Board in April and was tabled to the May meeting, but the applicants reconfigured some of the lots and reduced the number of townhomes, and also reconfigured the roads. She said this is a redesign of the subdivision, but with the same theme as the Board looked at before. She stated that one change was a request for R-2 zoning with a PUD overlay, which does not significantly change the density of the proposal; it is now about 3 1/2 dwellings per acre, and the R-2 zone allows up to 5 dwellings per acre. She stated the PUD allows flexibility with the type of housing units allowed, clustering, and flexibility with the setbacks. Wilson stated this project is on 31 acres and is currently zoned county R-2 with a minimum lot size of 20,000 square feet; the city R-2 calls for 9600 square feet so there is a significant difference between the zones. She said this is a four phase proposal with a PUD overlay, with 98 lots created as a whole; Phase 1 includes the area to the east with a cul- de-sac off of Three Mile Drive with 20 townhouses. There is a knoll at the top which is fairly significant, so the townhomes Kalispell City Planning Board Minutes of the meeting of June 9, 2004 Page 5 of 18 would be single story level on the knoll, with an additional 12 townhouses to the north, and all of the townhouses in the development would be two -unit townhouses. She stated the townhouses to the north would be accessed via an internal roadway, privately owned and maintained by the owners of the houses; there will also be two single family homes. Wilson said that Phase 2 is to the west, and it will have six townhouses and 26 single family homes, and there will be two neighborhood commercial lots further to the west, along with an access road, which has been moved away from the creek bed. There will be a single road crossing over Bowser Spring Creek. She stated the commercial area was moved to the, west after site review and the access road connects to the Blue Herron subdivision to the north. Wilson went on to explain that Phase 3 moves the internal road further to the south, and includes six townhouses and eight single family lots. Phase 4 is the final phase, with 10 townhouses, a loop road, and 18 single family homes. Wilson went over the PUD criteria and the surrounding land uses. She said the city limits lie to the north of this property with Blue Herron which is zoned City R-2 (9,600 square feet), to the south is County R-2 (20,000 square feet minimum), west is zoned R-1, and further to the northeast is Empire Estates, which is R-4 zoning. She said that activity in Blue Herron is brisk and demand is high; we are right at the urban -rural interface between the City and County. She stated that Blue Herron has about 2 1/2 dwelling units per acre, and this project has about 3 1/2. Wilson explained the primary deviations for the PUD would be to allow the two unit townhouses, and a smaller minimum lot size requirement for the single family homes. She corrected the density by taking out the two commercial units, so the density would be 96 dwelling units, or 3.1 dwelling units per acre. She said there is a significant amount of flood plain on the FEMA map for this area, which is a non -detailed study area, so we really don't know where the base flood area is. Lots cannot be created within the 100 year flood plain, so the developers are doing a detailed study to submit to FEMA for analysis, which will determine where the flood plain actually lies. It must be done and accepted by FEMA before the base flood elevation can be accepted, and it is very unlikely the flood plain encompasses the entire area currently indicated as lying in the 100 year flood plain. There is obvious drainage that runs through center of the site; and there is a riparian zone where the vegetation is. Wilson said the developers are intending to leave the drainage area undisturbed and in it's natural state; it will be a homeowner's area to be maintained and conserved in a natural state, and will be restricted from development in that Kalispell City Planning Board Minutes of the meeting of June 9, 2004 Page 6 of 18 area. She said that most of the lots are outside of that riparian zone. Wilson explained the commercial element of the property and stated that staff was concerned about the timing and architecture of the commercial element; there needs to be standards that require a well established neighborhood to be served, with compatible architectural and landscaping once developed. She stated that staff is making some recommendations to modify the overall design by converting the six townhouse lots near the riparian at the southeast corner of phase 3 into single family lots to avoid encroachment into the riparian area and create consistent single family homes that would border the subdivision to the south. Also, she noted staff is recommending that a 60 foot right of way reservation be created on the internal access road to the west to provide access to the property to the west which would avoid an additional direct access onto Three Mile Drive. Wilson noted the two approaches onto Three Mile Drive will need approval from MDT. Staff noted there is a recommendation for a 20 foot landscape buffer along Three Mile Drive with a bike and pedestrian path. Wilson reiterated that no lots can be platted until the detailed study is accepted by FEMA and the flood plain is detailed, so development is limited to the Phase 1 area for now. She said the developers are proposing a recreation area to the north that would be developed with equipment and amenities. Wilson noted that two letters from property owners in the area, including the Two Mile Drive Homeowners' Association, were received recently and they had concerns about the wildlife corridor, neighborhood compatibility, traffic impacts and utility easements to the south. Wilson noted there is a one foot controlled access strip on the northern boundary of Two Mile Subdivision, so that roads cannot be connected to the south; they would need permission to extend the utilities. Another letter from an owner on Two Mile Drive was concerned about the neighborhood character and impacts to wildlife. Wilson stated that staff is recommending adoption of the staff reports and that this property be zoned R-2/PUD, and the preliminary plat be approved, subject to the listed conditions. She noted the conditions will be the same for both the PUD and the preliminary Plat. QUESTIONS BY THE Taylor asked how the FEMA study would impact the phasing BOARD schedule. Kalispell City Planning Board Minutes of the meeting of June 9, 2004 Page 7 of 18 Wilson said it would limit development essentially to Phase 1 because it is the only area outside of the .100 year flood plain, but the developer must wait until the study is accepted by FEMA to do any more, including create additional lots. Taylor asked how long the study would take and could it push the development's full buildout to more than the 12 years projected. Wilson said it may take several months to finish the study, but 12 years was a conservative estimate of buildout and the market is really moving now. She estimates the buildout at five to six years if the market continues the way it is. Taylor stated we are looking at 98 lots now and asked how many were looked at back in April. Wilson said it was 103 lots, with more townhouse lots than single family lots. Wilson stated another staff recommendation was made that a 60 foot right of way reservation be made to the west in case that property gets developed in order to avoid an additional access. There is an access already to this property off of Three Mile Drive, but it not a good access. Norton stated that they had actually received three letters, including one from Rex Boller, which was included in the packet. Atkinson asked for clarification on the one foot easement to the south and if it was imposed by this developer or the one to the south. He also asked if the City was requiring stubouts of services to the south. Wilson stated it was imposed by the Two Mile developer in order to control access to that subdivision; the easement cannot be crossed. She said the City was requiring stubouts of services because they would provide logical extensions of the utilities. She said that Two Mile uses septic systems, and so they may be needing sewer access at some point in the future if those septic systems fail. Taylor stated he appreciated Wilson's comments regarding the character of the development, and asked her to comment on the character of the surrounding neighborhood. Wilson described the area as an urban -rural interface area, and because of the utility extensions, she predicts this area will feel serious growth pressure to continue. She said it was agricultural to the west in the past, and large tracts have acted as an urban reserve; it is difficult to redevelop two or Kalispell City Planning Board Minutes of the meeting of June 9, 2004 Page 8 of 18 three acre parcels after utilities are available, so these are good parcels. She stated this is an area in transition. Taylor asked if staff looked at "how much is enough" and if there was any discussion of options available with regard to the number of townhouses. Wilson stated they look at what is appropriate for the area, but also at development within the City, and this is consistent with urban scale development. She said the townhouses provide some additional density, and that the two unit townhouse configuration is very popular recently, especially for older people who do not want a single family home. She stated she feels it is a good example of housing configuration (single story, two unit townhouse). She said the subdivision is consistent when public utilities are available, and there is an affordability index; the larger the lot, the more expensive it is to develop - it is a matter of economics. Taylor asked how this density would compare to Buffalo Stage. Wilson said this density is slightly less, and there are duplexes in that development as well. Hull asked about the commercial lots and how they would look. Wilson answered they would be addressed in the covenants when the final plat is submitted; the zoning regulations allow limited types of commercial uses in the R-2 zone. She said there may be some type of convenience store, but would not have gas for sale. Atkinson asked about the extension of services agreement and if we have agreed to repay the developer who initially extended those services. Wilson said that is a City Council issue, not a Board issue. PUBLIC HEARING The public hearing was opened to those who wished to speak on the issue. APPLICANTS/AGENCIES Russell Purdy, 241 Commons Way, stated that he is a realtor and that he grew up on a farm, so he knows about water and the flood plain. He stated the flood plain work is finished, and that FEMA is working on it. He said the FEMA study to the north of this property ended up being significantly smaller, and that in the Two Mile Subdivision to the south, a lot of their lot lines go to the creek, but he did not want that. He said that his lots do not go into the riparian area, except for the one small area which Wilson noted. He stated that the Kalispell City Planning Board Minutes of the meeting of June 9, 2004 Page 9 of 18 building footprint does go into some bushes, and there used to be a fence there, but it is not in the stream. He said the footprint of the buildings and lots are not in the stream, and he wants to keep residents access out of the stream and the riparian area. He stated he is keeping lot sizes to a minimum, he is putting the land to a good use and will retain as much of the woodland character as possible. He said he tried to answer the concerns of the neighbors, and he took the larger density units out of the previous proposal. He said that as for the 60 foot right of way on the west side, it was part of the buy -sell agreement; the previous owner wanted a 40 foot right of way to her two acre parcel. He said he does not see the need to force him to create another easement further down of another 60 feet to the same piece of property and he hopes the Board appreciates his trying to keep the lots out of the streams and making them part of the common area instead. Lisa Wurster, Thomas Dean and Hoskins, engineers on the project, stated that they feel the R-2 zoning is in character with the area, and they have slightly revised the plat from what is in front of the Board tonight. She said they removed the six townhouses to the north and replaced them with four single family lots, so now there will be 14 townhomes in Phase 1. She also said one access matches up with Stillwater Road and another with Blue Herron, and that approach permits currently exist. She said they have sent a letter of map amendment to FEMA, and FEMA has accepted the data and will get back to them; their data is very different from the old delineation lines. She said this will have a minimal impact on the school system and they estimate 1/2 student per home, or 48 students entering the school system. She said they are providing 5.35 acres of open space along the wetlands, with a recreation area with amenities to the north. Wurster reiterated that they do not agree with conditions 16 and 18 in the staff report. In response to the letters received, she said they feel the density is in compliance and that they have tried to minimize their impacts. She said that no sediments will go in the creek, there will be no septic systems, so water quality is not negatively impacted, and they are not disturbing the wildlife corridor. She said they do have two 10 foot easements to the south to extend utilities, if they can get over the one foot strip. In response to a question from Taylor about the setbacks, Wurster explained that the PUD is asking for zero lot line setbacks between the townhomes, 20 in the rear, and five in the front and on the side. They are asking for a reduction from 10 feet to five feet; at 10 foot setbacks, they would have to reduce the density, or refigure the road, or put the lots in the riparian area. Purdy stated that if forced to use 10 foot setbacks, they would have to reduce the density, but said that the City put in 12 inch lines in anticipation of growth Kalispell City Planning Board Minutes of the meeting of June 9, 2004 Page 10 of 18 out that way, and this is a better design. Wurster spoke about the traffic concerns, and said that traffic on Three Mile Drive can't be helped until impact fees are established, but the bike path will provide a safe place for kids to walk. Purdy reiterated that he disagreed with condition 18, adding a 60 easement to the property he already has a 40 foot easement to, and condition 16, moving the lots to the south out of the marked flood plain area. PUBLIC COMMENT I The following spoke in support of the project: Phil Neuharth, 279 Morningview Drive, realtor, stated that he feels this is a very good plan, and there is very strong demand for townhouse units now; he feels they will see a continuing demand for the townhouse units, and this is a nice blend of single family homes and duplexes. Charles Lapp, 3230 Columbia Falls Stage, stated that there has been a lot of time put in to this project, he likes the access to adjoining properties, and there probably are pockets where water is retained in the spring, but that it is not a flood plain. He said the houses to the south would be underwater if this is actually a flood plain. He said that the commercial area may not actually be used as commercial, so they have the option to switch it back to residential. He mentioned a developer in Boise who creates riparian areas in his subdivisions, and that this is a great opportunity for a community area. He feels there are good setbacks and they did a wonderful job at keeping some open area. The following spoke in opposition to the project: Terri Smith, 58 West View Drive, stated that her neighborhood realizes that there will be growth, but they want it to be like their zoning (County R-2). She said this project will impact them greatly, and one homeowner will have three houses directly out of his windows. She said her neighborhood does not want townhouses backing up to their property. She said there is a lot of wildlife in the area, with bears, foxes, etc. and they want the wildlife corridor to be well preserved and keep impact to a minimum. She is also concerned that the West Valley school district would be impacted; they are already having funding trouble, and would these homeowners vote in the City or in West Valley for funding? She stated that traffic alone going to the junior high is horrific now, and it is a dangerous area. She said the setbacks are a problem for them, and they feel that a 10 foot setback is reasonable for fire safety, and five is far too close. She said the floodplain is a real issue in the area, and the Kalispell City Planning Board Minutes of the meeting of June 9, 2004 Page 11 of 18 trees died on West View because they sat in standing water from a flood six years ago. She stated that flooding is a real factor, that it does not happen every year, but it happens quite often. She asked where the storm water would go and how will it effect Spring Creek? Bob Gates, 136 West View Drive, stated that he is concerned with the density, and that it seems out of character with the neighborhood, at least on the south side of Three Mile Drive. He stated the lots are about 1/3 the size of Two Mile subdivision lots and it is very heavy density. They will be looking into the back yards of 16-18 lots and people are moving away. He said there are no streetlights in Two Mile, and they will have light pollution,' noise pollution, and site pollution, and he bets the price of his house goes down. He said he feels it is not really R-2 zoning with the commercial and the setbacks, and suggested letting Three Mile Drive be the buffer between higher and lower density and that Meridian is dysfunctional. He said the storm water retention plan is just a low spot in the flood plain, and the water is just going to get dumped into the creek, and there was not a lot of consideration given to the wildlife. Ken Hannah, 91 West View Drive, stated that his: front yard will face all of the new back yards and that he just bought his house. He said that every house on his block is now for sale except his. He stated he is bothered by the minimum lot sizes, and this is not in character with his neighborhood, which are 1/2 acre plus homesites, a very mature and very well done subdivision. He said he has concerns with the five foot setback and that is a serious fire hazard and that the density is not in character with the neighborhood. He said that safety is still a big concern, and that open space is good, but is it going to be safe? Kids will play in the creek no matter what. He is also concerned about safety on Three Mile Drive and Meridian Road and said he appreciates the Board taking the time to listen to their concerns. Bonnie Dowan, 146 West View Drive, stated she is very concerned about the five foot setback; she lived in a subdivision where fire spread from house to house. She feels that five feet is not nearly enough. Gavin Corrigan, 121 West View Drive, stated that he is concerned about the access to the back of the new lots from their subdivision and he feels there will be extra traffic on their roads. He feels the density is out of character with their subdivision and he would prefer the lots in the back face West View and be 1/2 acre lots. Mark Skwarchuk, 1958 Great View Drive, stated he is currently building in Aspen Knoll, and it is a very attractive area, and there are not many areas like it in the City. He is Kalispell City Planning Board Minutes of the meeting of June 9, 2004 Page 12 of 18 afraid this subdivision will contribute to the hodgepodge. He stated that it was inevitable for growth to occur, but he would prefer some transition of densities. He said he was in complete disapproval for any multiple dwellings and is extremely concerned about rental units, which he feels completely changes the character of the neighborhood. He said he is opposed to any commercial development because of traffic, neon, etc, and wants Three Mile Drive to be the buffer between higher density projects and larger parcels. PUBLIC HEARING CLOSED No one else wished to speak and the public hearing was closed. MOTION Norton moved to adopt Staff Reports KA-04-11 and KPUD- 04-5 as findings of fact and, based on these findings, recommend to the Kalispell City Council that the initial zoning for 30.77 acres of land be R-2, Single Family Residential, with a PUD overlay upon annexation to the City of Kalispell with conditions 16 and 18 removed. The motion died for lack of a second. MOTION Taylor moved and Atkinson seconded to adopt Staff Reports KA-04-11 and KPUD-04-5 as findings of fact and, based on these findings, recommend to the Kalispell City Council that the initial zoning for 30.77 acres of land be R-2, Single Family Residential, with a PUD overlay upon annexation to the City of Kalispell subject to the 26 listed conditions. BOARD DISCUSSION Taylor asked Wilson where the access roads are in the subdivision to the south. Wilson answered that Two Mile Drive is about 1/2 mile to the south, and the subdivisions have direct access off of Two Mile Drive. She stated that tonight's speakers reside on the lots backing on the new subdivision. Atkinson asked Wilson about the recommendation to take out the duplexes on the lower portion, but the developer has already taken them out of the upper portion. Could the developer put the duplexes back into the upper portion if he is required to remove them from the lower portion? Wilson said yes, he could. Atkinson also asked about the existing easement to the north and if it is a road to Tract 1. Wilson suggested that the easement could be extended all the way to Three Mile Drive, but it would take another curb cut and driveway, and MDT may not allow it. Kalispell City Planning Board Minutes of the meeting of June 9, 2004 Page 13 of 18 C� Purdy stated he moved the road to meet up with Blue Herron to the north, and it is on the plat. Atkinson said it would be in the best interests of Tract 1 to not have a road that parallels Three Mile Drive, and it might be easier to negotiate moving the easement to the south. Purdy stated it is being discussed, but the previous owner wanted it that way. Norton stated that when this project came before us in April, density was a major issue, but the way this is laid out it is a buffer zone; it allows open space between the denser areas. He said the developer is addressing the density by leaving the space open. He also said that water flows downhill, and that Two Mile Tracts is in the flood plain and is a lower elevation, and they need to trust FEMA to make the call about this subdivision. He hopes the road can be moved to the south, but understands if the property owner does not want to do that. He said the townhomes to the south are a density issue, but we should not restrict the owner to creating the lots as single family by the flood plain, and he was glad they set up utility easements to the south and tried to address all of the previous issues. He feels the developer has met the requirements for this area. Atkinson stated that the Board and Council are also frustrated with school and road impacts, but we can't do anything right now. He said it is very frustrating to school districts and road crews to have the need and no money to do anything about it. He said he advocates density in and around the urban areas, and the density in the county was low density because of septic systems, and the idea for being on City services is to save the land further out so that it is not developed. He asked if light pollution was normally addressed in a residential subdivision. Wilson said that it is addressed in the design and construction standards, and that condition 21 states lighting will be shielded. She stated the City may not have stringent enough standards to evaluate the type of lighting proposed and that lighting districts maintained by Flathead Electric Coop are formed. She said the developer chooses the type of lighting in a subdivision, not FEC. Condition 21 is actually beyond the design and construction standards of the City. Taylor said the Board is looking at light pollution in the Architectural Review Standards right now. Atkinson further stated that he understands the concerns of the neighbors, but he wants them to understand the effects of growth at these types of levels is having everywhere in the Kalispell City Planning Board Minutes of the meeting of June 9, 2004 Page 14 of 18 �J Taylor stated he is concerned about the density, but in comparing this project to a City lot, this is equivalent to 16 city blocks, or 192 housing units for 30 acres, and this density is below that, so the density is not as bad as people think it is. He stated that backyards can be a problem to look at, because things that are not used or maintained all the time are kept in backyards. He wished there was a condition addressing this. He said he is bothered by the five foot setback between the buildings due to fire hazards, but the positives in the proposal outweigh the negatives. He said he is very concerned about the setbacks and the backyards. Anderson is also concerned about the five foot setbacks, and she still has an issue with the density that it still does not go with the neighborhood. She stated she agreed with condition 16 to change the duplexes to single family lots. Hull asked about the five foot setback and if it is just for the duplexes or the houses as well. Wilson stated it is for the houses as well, and setbacks are measured from the drip line of the roof of the building, so there would be 13 feet between the buildings. She said that fire safety is a minimal issue with regard to setbacks, and the City has a professional fire department and the project will have hydrants, etc. She said if this is an aesthetic issue, let's just say so. Hull also stated that he is opposed to the duplexes on the edge of the property next to the neighbors. Hinchey stated that the density is not in keeping with the neighborhood and the 10 foot setback is an aesthetic issue. He feels there will still be plenty of space to build with a 10 foot setback. MOTION (WAIVE Hull moved to waive condition 18 (the 60 foot road). Norton CONDITION) seconded. BOARD DISCUSSION Atkinson said he will vote against the amendment because the road may not be allowed to be an entrance into Tract 1, and if we delete the condition they lose the ability to get into Tract 1 if MDT refuses to allow the road. Norton stated they don't know what is going to happen with the commercial building, and the road can be addressed at that time. The commercial building can be moved, etc, and still retain the easement on the north portion of the lot. He said that due diligence could allow the road to work. Kalispell City Planning Board Minutes of the meeting of June 9, 2004 Page 15 of 18 C� ROLL CALL (AMENDMENT) The amendment failed 2-4 on a roll call vote. ROLL CALL (MAIN MOTION) The main motion passed 4-2 on a roll call vote. MOTION (PRELIMINARY Norton moved and Atkinson seconded to adopt staff report PLAT) KPP-04-8 as findings of fact and, based on these findings, recommend to the Kalispell City Council that preliminary plat approval for a 98-lot mixed use subdivision be given to Bowser Creek Estates subject to the 26 listed conditions. BOARD DISCUSSION Taylor said he is still troubled by the setback condition, and whether we should overlook it or vote negative. He said he would like an option of feasibility, but he does not feel it would be a proper condition. Wilson said it would be appropriate to add something to the plat for a landscape buffer at the rear of the lots to screen them. She suggested language for the amendment. Taylor said he also is concerned about the setbacks, but he does not know what the impact on the developer would be. Wilson stated that, as an alternative, there could be a minimum 10 foot setback condition placed on lots 65-73. Norton asked if that could apply to just the townhome sites and not to the single family sites, or make the townhouse lots five foot setbacks and the single family lots 10 feet on the whole plat. AMENDMENT Taylor moved and Hull seconded to add Condition 27 that a 6 foot high and 10 foot wide landscape buffer consisting of a coniferous vegetative buffer be created on the southern boundary of the development (lots 65-73). Taylor amended his motion to just make it 6 feet high within three years. FURTHER DISCUSSION Norton stated that this was too great a restriction on the lots and we should show some faith in the homeowners that they would install fences or buffers on their own. He stated he sympathizes with Two Mile Tracts, but the developer should have considered that the field would eventually be developed. Norton asked if a decrease in the lot sizes was taken into consideration or if fences could be erected if this buffer were to be required. Taylor said if we did not specify a width, it should not be that intrusive. Kalispell City Planning Board Minutes of the meeting of June 9, 2004 Page 16 of 18 ROLL CALL (CONDITION The amendment passed 5-1 on a roll call vote. 27) AMENDMENT (CONDITION Taylor moved and Hull seconded that the 5 foot setbacks be 28) restricted to the townhome lots and that 10 foot setbacks be required for single family homes. DISCUSSION PJ Sorenson, Zoning Administrator for the City of Kalispell, stated that this should go into the PUD and not on the plat, because it is difficult for their office to track on the plat. It should be spelled out in the PUD, and it is not a zoning requirement if it is on the plat. There was discussion on how to make sure the conditions for the zoning and the plat were identical. ROLL CALL (AMENDMENT) The amendment passed 5-1 on a roll call vote. ROLL CALL (MAIN MOTION) The main motion passed 4-2 on a roll call vote. MOTION Taylor moved and Norton seconded to add the same conditions to the PUD staff report. ROLL CALL The motion passed unanimously on a roll call vote. HEUSHER INITIAL ZONING A request by Larry and Sandy Heusher for an initial zoning UPON ANNEXATION designation of R-3, Single Family Residential and R-4, Two Family Residential on 12 acres located on the west side of Country Way South on the east side of the Stillwater River upon annexation to the City of Kalispell. CONTINUED AT THE REQUEST OF THE APPLICANT STILLWATER BLUFFS A request for preliminary plat approval of Stillwater Bluffs, a SUBDIVISION 30 lot residential subdivision on 12 acres with a zoning PRELIMINARY PLAT designation of R-3 and R-4 upon annexation to the City of REQUEST Kalispell. CONTINUED AT THE REQUEST OF THE APPLICANT CITY OF KALISPELL A request by the City of Kalispell to amend the B-2, General ZONING TEXT Business zoning district to allow day care centers as a AMENDMENT REQUEST permitted use in the Kalispell Zoning Ordinance. STAFF REPORT KZTA-04-1 Narda Wilson, with the Tri-City Planning Office, gave a presentation of Staff Report KZTA-04-2, a request by the City of Kalispell to amend the B-2, General Business zoning district to allow day care centers as a permitted use in the Kalispell Zoning Ordinance. Wilson explained that this was a housekeeping amendment to include day care centers as a permitted use in the B-2 Kalispell City Planning Board Minutes of the meeting of June 9, 2004 Page 17 of 18 (7) zone, which was inadvertently omitted. She said the City is assisting Head Start by trying to get a grant for a new building, and they have found property that overlooks Woodland Park in a B-2 zone, but B-2 does not allow day care centers. She stated that this was an oversight and staff recommends adoption of the staff report. PUBLIC HEARING The public hearing was opened to those who wished to speak on the issue. APPLICANT/AGENCIES Wilson noted the staff representing were the applicants and supported the proposed amendment. PUBLIC COMMENT No one wished to speak and the public hearing was closed. MOTION Atkinson moved and Anderson seconded to adopt staff report KZTA-04-2 as findings of fact and, based on these findings, recommend to the Kalispell City Council that the Kalispell Zoning Ordinance be amended to allow day care centers as a permitted use in the B-2, General Business District. BOARD DISCUSSION There was no discussion. ROLL CALL The motion passed unanimously on a roll call vote. OLD BUSINESS There was no old business. NEW BUSINESS Wilson discussed the Planning Board work program for the next fiscal year. She noted the listed items, and stated that she added a fall review of the Growth Policy as previously discussed by the board. She said it will be forwarded on to the City Council for their approval. MOTION Taylor moved and Anderson seconded to forward the work program to the Kalispell City Council which passed unanimously on a voice vote. ADJOURNMENT The meeting was adjourned at approximately 10:25 p.m. The next meeting of the Kalispell City Planning Board and Zoning Commission will be held on Tuesday, July 13, 2004. There will be a joint meeting with the Architectural Review Board held on June 23. dent Judi Funk Recording Secretary APPROVED as submitted/corrected: _A/V-t'> /04 Kalispell City Planning Board Minutes of the meeting of Tune 9, 2004 Page 18 of 18