Loading...
05-14-02KALISPELL CITY PLANNING BOARD & ZONING COMMISSION MINUTES OF MEETING MAY 14, 2002 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: Ron Van Natta, Mark Brechel, Jim Atkinson, Bonnie Spooner, Bill Rice, Sue Ellyn Anderson and Jean Johnson. Narda Wilson represented the Tri-City Planning Office. There were approximately 100 people in the audience. APPROVAL OF MINUTES Atkinson moved and Johnson seconded to approve the minutes of the Kalispell City Planning Board meeting of April 9, 2002, as submitted. On a vote by acclamation the motion passed unanimously. Van Natta asked if anyone on the Board had any disclosures that they wanted to make about the upcoming Bucky Wolford LLC Master Plan Amendment. Johnson stepped down from the board due to a possible conflict of interest. Brechel stated he wrote an article that appeared in the Daily Interlake concerning the upcoming Bucky Wolford LLC Master Plan Amendment. He read a statement regarding that article and chose to remain seated. Atkinson was concerned that if he remained seated he may be subject to possible lawsuit. Brechel stated he spoke to the City Attorney about it and chose to remain seated. WOLFORD DEVELOPMENT, A request by Wolford Development, LLC for an amendment to LLC MASTER PLAN the Kalispell City -County Master Plan on approximately 232 AMENDMENT acres on property located near the north east corner of LaSalle Road and East Reserve Drive from Light Industrial, Agricultural and Residential to a Commercial, High Density Residential and Public. STAFF REPORT Narda Wilson, of the Tri-City Planning Office, gave a #KMPA-02-2 presentation of staff report KMPA-02-2, a Kalispell City - County Master Plan amendment. Staff reviewed the project background and explained the nature of the request. Wilson noted this was the first step in a two-step process. Upon evaluation of the findings of fact Wilson made three recommendations; adoption of the findings of fact for the Master Plan amendment; forwarding a recommendation to adopt a land use designation consisting of commercial, high density residential and urban residential, as indicated on the site plan, and, forwarding a recommendation to require a Kalispell City Planning Board Minutes of the meeting of May 14, 2002 Pa o.- 1 Planned Unit Development overlay for the commercial area that incorporates the goals and policies outlined in Attachment A. Wilson passed out an exhibit that reflected staffs recommendation. APPLICANT/AGENCIES James L. "Bucky" Wolford, of Wolford Development, Inc., introduced his team of consultants. He said the team was put together to work on issues that would be dealt with as part of the PUD application, adding that the traffic study would be completed within two weeks and the hydrologist study would be completed with the PUD application. Wolford referred to a site plan to explain their ideas for the mall and the associated center adjacent to the mall. He emphasized the road system would be built by Wolford Development, Inc. and said they were not asking for any assistance or subsidy. He said they would construct Glacier Way and dedicate it to the City. Wolford commented on the importance of the location and gave reasons for selecting this particular site. He stated there were two department stores committed to the project and if approved by fall, they would break ground next spring and open the project in the spring of 2005. Wolford addressed project design and displayed several renderings of the proposed mall. He explained that the design would incorporate natural elements of river rock, timber beams, and sky lighting both inside and out. Wolford also described the food court. He mentioned the size of the project and justified it from a market standpoint by displaying demographic comparisons taken from the 2000 Editors and Publisher Market Guide. He used a comparison of two other areas, Meridian, Mississippi, and Hatiesburg, Mississippi where he has built malls. Wolford noted general merchandise sales leakages to outlying areas, which he attributed to local department stores being undersized. He said he was in present negotiations with Herberger's for that reason. Wolford stated he was in disagreement of what should be the land use on the property. He said he felt strongly the land on the west side of Glacier Way should be commercial instead of high density residential and thought the site was appropriate for financial institutions and restaurants. Additionally, he referred to other land proposed as high density residential and suggested it would be appropriate for Hotel/Motel and should be zoned commercially as well. He said the road would be a major facility between Reserve and Rose Crossing and properties on the side should be in a commercial category. Wolford commented on other land use and zoning issues, particularly the RA-3, which would give them more flexibility. In closing he addressed the issue of employment by saying they would bring in a General Contractor but no sub -contractors, those would be bid locally. However, any project of $100,000 or more would require bonding. He said they anticipated 1,300 employees for the mall and another 700 for mall shops. Wolford projected average salaries of $9.08 per hour for non - Kalispell City Planning Board Minutes of the meeting of May 14, 2002 Page 2 in supervisory positions and $29,000 for store managers, plus $80,000 to $100,000 for department store managers, according to the National Retail Federation. John Parsons stated he was hired by Wolford Development, Inc. to bring the project through the process within the City limits of Kalispell. First step being annexation and the Master Plan and zoning designations. Parsons spoke of the meeting that took place between his client and the planning office this morning regarding changes to the land use. He passed around a letter from Land and Water Consultants and a revision to the staff report based on concerns they had from their morning meeting. He said he was not present at that meeting, but he handed out a map that reflected the agreements made. Jentz agreed that the site plan embraced the concepts they discussed but that in addition there were several policy statements that needed to be attached that further explain the proposal that Parson's presented. Parsons referenced the letter from Land and Water addressing storm water drainage and briefly stated there was additional discussion with Thomas, Dean, and Hoskins regarding traffic. Parsons then handed out a copy of the staff report with additions and deletions as proposed by the applicant. He then jumped into, the applicant revised staff report stating multiple requests for deletions and new information to consider. He stated the issues being asked to strike were argumentative, unnecessary and in some cases, misleading. He asked the board to either make a mental note of their questions or indicate his suggestions were amended on May 14, 2002. He also suggested wording for the motion. Parsons then addressed the two resolutions submitted by staff. Again, based on this mornings meeting a new resolution was prepared. He suggested additional verbiage and adopting as shown on the attached land use map. Parsons also referenced Attachment A and requested more deletions and additions to the verbiage. Ken Kalvig, of Kaufman, Vidal and Hileman, stated he was local counsel for Wolford Development. He said the staff report addressed chronology of what had gone on since July of last year when they filed applications with the County Planning and Zoning Office and brought it forward as a County project. He then reviewed the history of actions involving the joint planning boards and joint City -County Master Plan. He ' noted the action of the County Commissioners in September 2001 to approve a Master Plan designation of commercial on 145 acres and a B-2 zone with a PUD overlay, which the City took exception to because they had not jointly approved the Master plan amendment. The City subsequently filed a lawsuit challenging this approval. He stated his client's position was that they do have Kalispell City Planning Board Minutes of the meeting of May 14, 2002 Paae 3 appropriate zoning on 145 acres of commercial as granted by the County. He said they are presently outside the city limits and seeking annexation. Adding that it made sense for them to bring it forward as a City project with the ultimate decision by City Council. Thus concluding that the application brought forward did not alter the filing or process of last year in regards to the City -County Master Plan and the zoning change approved by the County. He stated the applications they have filed and current proceedings do not preclude or limit them from taking it forward as a County project. He said they want to connect to city sewer and they hope it works out. However, if it cannot, it would not prevent them from getting it done as a County project. He stated they were concerned about the spin on the staff report not being as positive as it should have, therefore, as a matter of public record he read comments from a memo prepared by the City Manger, Chris Kukulski, from a January 14th meeting before the City Council. The memo was signed by Kukulski and Susan Moyer. A copy of the memo was provided, as well as a letter that Kalvig wrote, to Chairman Van Natta. Roger Noble, Land and Water Consulting, spoke on behalf of Wolford Development. He stated that upon contact by Wolford Development his office had a discussion on how they would participate and contribute. They decided it was better to be proactive and a player in the development process by contributing a viable storm water management plan. He said a major issue of concern would be ground and surface water quality, plus contributions to Flathead Lake. Noble stated they do not take the task of storm water contamination mitigation lightly and he defined the team's qualifications. He said they were in the process of modeling the peak flows and identifying various types of contaminants associated with parking lot runoff and treatment alternatives. He noted the concern for potential use of wetlands for dispersion and treatment in the staff report. He stated they recognized that but that there are other sophisticated technologies in the process of designing a storm water management plan and how to treat it, control it, and disperse it. They anticipate the report will be prepared in early June and available for public comment. He said the developer looked at storm and ground water quality as a high priority issue and that it would be adequately addressed. 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 May 14, 2002 Page 4 PROPONENTS Steve Eudy, Kalispell Chamber of Commerce, spoke in support as a strong advocate. for sustainable business. He represented the collective views of their membership and stated they supported the proposed Master Plan change by a ratio of two to one. Reasons for their recommendation to support the amendment were; 30% population growth in the last decade; attracting regional and national retailers and developers; and it is contiguous to the existing commercial development along highway 2. He said Kalispell is the regional retail trade center for Northwest Montana and one of the primary activities of non-residents and visitors is shopping. He recommended a prudent, business -like approach be taken in evaluating this project and asked they review the costs to provide and maintain municipal services. He also recommended they address the water quality issues and look at the potential for short term and long-term tax base erosions. Eudy asked if there was a way to provide for local contractors on the project. Due to the scope of the project he said it would change traffic, shopping and development patterns permanently, which must change land use plans for the area. He emphasized that nearby areas continue to be developed according to urban design standards. He said the project at hand should not be an urban island in the middle of rural development. He stated they could not estimate with certainty what the impacts would be, but they stand ready with time, resources and expertise to assist any business that may feel they are adversely affected by the approval of the Master Plan amendment. Lee Kaufman, Kaufman, Vidal & Hileman, spoke in favor of the proposal as representative for Darlene Jump, property owner. Kaufman stated she has acted responsibly and on behalf of her and the Wolford group he said they were without a doubt the most outstanding developer they came in contact with. He said they have jumped through all the hoops and have a right to use the land as she sees fit. Bob Heron, 781 1st Ave. EN, supports the proposal stating it is desirable for growth to occur through quality development that promotes a strong tax base for our schools, County, and City. He strongly supported free enterprise in America and Wolford's decision to be a good citizen by paying for sewer extension, a new road, and $50,000 toward fire protection, stating it was a win/win situation. He said he spoke for the majority of citizens who are tired of the vocal minority who are opposed to growth. He urged the downtown businesspeople to not be afraid, saying it could be the best thing that ever happened. If it captures 60 million dollars being spent in other places then downtown could boom. He encouraged downtown business owners to reinvent themselves, and become the dining and cultural art center for Kalispell City Planning Board Minutes of the meeting of May 14, 2002 paaA r, the valley. Brian Beck spoke in favor of the project in regards to commerce for the area. He said he wanted to see our dollars stay in this area instead of going to Missoula to shop. He thought the downtown was a prime area in addition to the proposed mall. He said it was a quality project and he urged the board to support it and not impose any unreasonable restrictions. He added that he was not in support of added pollution. That we had a big pond to protect and he was concerned as well. Dick Hammett spoke in favor stating he believed Wolford has done their homework. He thought it was a good project and well needed. He looked forward to it happening in the future. Charles Lapp, 3230 Columbia Falls Stage Rd., referred to the Master Plan, which was done in 1986, saying it should be reviewed and changed accordingly every 5 years. He thought it was time something was done other than agriculture and the Master Plan should change to a better use. Lapp stated he was in support of the mall project as a whole. Mike Jopek said he was disturbed by the process, since he came at 7:00 he could not get in the door and there were not enough seats, therefore, he was not able to hear the presentation and not adequately able to comment. Coming from Whitefish, and as Chairman of the Whitefish Planning Board, he was concerned about how this project would affect downtown business in Whitefish. He said there is only one pie to be shared amongst our economic interest. He was in favor of the concept of requiring market studies and socioeconomic studies. He was not able to hear everything, but Parsons saying delete this, delete that of the staff report was a large cause of concern. He noted that the drawings were renderings, and pointed out that they didn't have to happen. Jopek was in favor of tabling the project because they didn't have enough information to make an adequate decision. He also expressed concern about the phasing of the project stating there was no guarantee the other phases would be completed. He commented on the wage statistics saying 50% of retail workers earned less than $14,000. He said that if it boosts the economy he was in favor of it, but they needed more data. Jopek stated there were 40 plus members of the public who left because they could not hear and he thought they should have another opportunity. Brent Hall spoke in favor of the project. He stated he was one of the people who created the first Master Plan and it was sold on the premise that it would be re -looked at every 5 years. He thought they needed to be more visionary and plan for the people who come here. He said the 5 to 600 families moving in here a year don't have any place to shop. Kalispell City Planning Board Minutes of the meeting of May 14, 2002 Page 6 He added that the downtown has to learn how to compete. Bob Harris, 853 Highland Dr., spoke in favor. He said he lives in Whitefish and isn't concerned with the competition to Whitefish business, which is always in a state of flux. He said they should consider what would happen to the land if the mall didn't go in, like strip malls, because they could not do what Wolford could do. OPPONENTS Peggy Drayer, P.O. Box 1401, spoke in opposition to the proposal disagreeing with the idea that people come here to shop. She said they come to hunt, fish, and hike. She noted that large-scale buildings do effect the environment and have a significant impact. She said they didn't have all the hard facts. She said that people come for the environment and while she was camping she enjoyed many "Montana moments". She said you could not camp in the parking lot of a mall and she was opposed because she wanted to continue to enjoy those Montana moments. Kris Caister, 203 Skyles, stated there weren't enough facts. He said he wanted to see the issues of water quality, storm run off into Flathead Lake, and the aquifer under Glacier Mall addressed because he would hate to see it deteriorate. He wanted to know how many more empty buildings, which he called the "Ernst effect", were going to be around. He wondered what would happen to the Wal Mart building when they build a Super Wal Mart. He felt the community would end up looking exactly like every other community and thought we should become more visionary and maintain something special. He didn't think the mall would contribute to that idea. Bill Goodman stated he thought the decision tonight was about the appropriateness of the location for this type of development. He said they did not have enough information to make that decision. He feared they would take an innocent 56 acres and put up 20 square blocks of downtown, with three-story tall office space. He said they did not know about economic impacts, water quality, or ground water issues and hoped they would reject it until those questions were answered. He said the Master Plan designated downtown as the central business district and changing it for this development also changes it for downtown. Floyd Thomas, 566 Ash Rd., stated his property, a 2-acre horse ranch, was directly south of the proposed development. He had personal concerns for a development of this magnitude going into his neighborhood. Thomas stated major concerns over water quality because he was on a well and costs to hook into Evergreen water would be close to $15,000. He was afraid that if the water quality issue was not adequately addressed it would effect the quality of his Kalispell City Planning Board Minutes of the meeting of May 14, 2002 Pa gP. 7 well water. He was also concerned about traffic and the impact to his property. He listened to the Wolford team address traffic to the north, east and west, but not to the south. He thought they needed more information before they make an amendment to the Master Plan. George Taylor, 504 5th Ave E., stated he was in opposition based on the fact they needed more information. He said he wasn't there to regard Kalispell as a cute, small town with all the amenities of a big city, without all the population, but expressed concern for balance. He wanted more information on the socioeconomic and environmental impacts and said they couldn't make a sound decision with out it. He didn't have a clue where the money was coming from to pay for city services, such as police, fire, road construction, maintenance, or snow removal. He heard there were two big department stores willing to make the investment, but he's heard nothing about big businesses coming in to supplant what will be taken away from downtown if all the money goes 5 miles east. He also had concerns about his property values. He suggested they follow the example of former Governor Roscoe and study the issues, get the facts, then come together for a meeting of the minds. Shellie Spilis stated she was not opposed, but needed more answers. She wanted to know how they could change the zoning when they didn't know how it would affect the water. She stated concerns over the proposed Glacier Way being less than a 1/2 mile from Helena Flats School, where her children attend. She said they had been pleading for a bike path, but that won't insure their safety. She also had concerns for the wildlife. Spilis was baffled by the process and thought it was ridiculous that they could move along in such a swift manner without a public forum. She thought people would want to band together and look at how they want the future to look. She said that maybe they could be innovative, not just jump on the first thing that came along. Cole Milstead, 7th Ave. W., stated they did not have all the answers and he was opposed to the amendment. He noted the first two hours were spent presenting one side and he thought they needed all the facts and figures, especially regarding environment and traffic. He said we already have a mall with a farmers market that comes out in the spring. He likes locally owned businesses because prices are low and the money goes back into the valley. He said he grew up in Austin, Texas and has seen what happens to the competition, which is ghost malls and empty buildings like we have around the valley. He saw sprawl and how it happens. He said he enjoys what we have here, driving down roads and being able to see the mountains. He mentioned the neon and new buildings on the south end of town and said he saw a block to the open spaces we cherish. He saw Kalispell City Planning Board Minutes of the meeting of May 14, 2002 Page 8 the future as bumper -to -bumper traffic, congestion, and had a valid concern of pollution. He suggested they get all the facts and if they didn't have them all then don't make a decision. Chuck Cummings, 4th Ave. E., stated the inevitable development that was coming to town was unattractive. He agreed with the arguments made about the quality of life, which is the reason people move here. To propose a development of this size outside the main body of town is naive to think it won't have a detrimental impact on the rest of the town. He saw an attractive set of drawings for a development that he wondered if we wanted to trade our town for. He suggested they just say no. Diane Taylor said she is a teacher at Helena Flats School and had concerns because the plans say high density residential. She referred to a similar development in Missoula and said they don't have a school anymore because nobody wants to live around the mall. She wondered what happened to other schools where Wolford malls were built. She also wondered about leaking dollars and didn't understand how buying Old Navy kept dollars here locally. She also didn't know anyone who made $9 an hour working at a mall. She urged them to think about the impacts. She said she didn't like the traffic in big cities and she loved the way it was now. She wished we could keep it this way for the next generations and said it was an awfully big change. Norm Art, 948 7th Ave E., asked to go on record as opposed. He agreed there were not enough facts. He thought there were issues they didn't know about, like what happens to Flathead Lake, and although $50,000 for a fire station was a nice idea, it was a big expense and he wondered who was going to pay for it. Same with the sewer. He agreed with a persons right to sell their property, but thought it would sell one way or another and if they sold to small businesses they would make more money over 100 small checks than 1 big one. He said the money goes to China and big corporations, not to Kalispell. He also had concerns about traffic and the need for expansion of roads, ,like LaSalle, Reserve and Rose Crossing. Art stated concern about the influx of minimum wage putting strain on our social services. He also brought up the issue of smog, saying if you have a concentration of vehicles in one place injected into high pressure whether you will have an awful increase in smog in the center of the valley. . He added that if people want to be visionary he would like to see public transportation. J Janelle Gentry stated that most points had been covered and she was opposed because of the lack of facts. She is a business owner and concerned about the pie being only so big. She said most people don't have excess income to shop Kalispell City Planning Board Minutes of the meeting of May 14, 2002 Pn ap Q elsewhere. She added that traffic was a huge issue. She said if the facts support it and they won't end up with more empty spaces she would change her position. Sharon DeMeester, 415Chestnut Drive, spoke in opposition, not as a business owner, because she was sure it would not effect her, but as a citizen. She said she wanted to have good planning, good information, and to know what was going to happen to taxes, which have increased 13% and she wondered what future tax impacts would be. She also wondered, when they annex, what else was involved, how much land and what would happen to that land. She likes the uniqueness of the valley and the small town. She said she hates malls and never goes because they are all the same. She wanted to hear all the facts and in a forum with a large enough area to accommodate the public. She also wanted the board to state their position as to why they came to their decision. Bob White, 636 6th Ave E., said it was difficult to decide for or against. He thought the development would happen, but what tipped the scale was the presentations heavy handedness, telling them that if the annexation didn't go through they would push the project through anyway. He said we have a right and obligation to plan how and where development takes place. As a trained economist he disagreed with the comparison of two communities to Flathead Valley saying we are in a snow belt with residents who leave during the winter. He thought an economic study of this type of development was wise. He noted we had a history of leaving behind relics of former developments. He wondered what their intent was with Herberger's and JC Penny, which would leave a large cavity in the current facility. He thought they should take a proactive approach and try to plan the community. Pauline Sjardal, 234 3rd Ave. W., spoke in opposition stating reasons of recent events, such as Home Depot's statistics and misrepresentations about using local contractors and higher wages. She noted that Stream made similar promises. Sjardal said they all had excellent PR people. She said we don't need anymore empty storefronts and wondered what would happen to Bitney's and Vann's. She felt this could change the landscape. She reiterated that they didn't have the facts and suggested the project go on hold until they do. She said they have 6 months to 1 year to find out what impacts Home Depot has on the community and asked that they please think about it before developing more land. She pointed out that there were new stores on the south end of town that weren't filled. She felt it left them as pawns of a bigger system. Don Schwenessen, Bigfork, stated he was concerned about Kalispell City Planning Board Minutes of the meeting of May 14, 2002 Page 10 community planning issues such as traffic, sprawl, clean water, low wages and higher taxes. He thought it was a great mall located in the wrong place. He read from a prepared speech making reference to needing market studies, paying dearly for highways, conferring commercial property rights, sprawl, and spending millions to buy new right of ways and displace landowners in order to build replacement highways, such as the proposed Kalispell bypass, where the State of Montana is already proposing commercial development. He wondered who was taking care of the taxpayer investment in our highways and when we would say no to sprawl. He thought change was inevitable, but true, unregulated growth had the same philosophy as cancer. He did not want to become the next Houston or San Fernando Valley. Asta Bowen, Somers, stated she did not want any more information. She has seen other communities and what has happened and felt this had an outcome that a lot of people didn't want. She thought we were vulnerable to a "rescue fantasy". She said we have treasure here, with irreplaceable farmland and open space that the valley would not be what it is without, which is a small town quality of life. She stated that those who come to bring projects like this development are not beholden to us to preserve our community for our children. She felt the last thing we need is more stuff, that we have enough stuff. She remembered when the landfill was a pit instead of a mountain. She felt we did not need to give up our irreplaceable treasures for more stuff and that growth was NOT inevitable. This is America and that's why it's not inevitable. Susanne Johnson, 680 Stone St., wanted to add that as a capitalist her livelihood depended on growth. She had nothing against the mall, but thought it was in the wrong spot. She said Kalispell is like a jewel and we are in a very good position for developers who would love to come in and develop here, but felt they were putting the cart before horse. She thought they were letting this project decide instead of us deciding how and where we want our community to grow. She said we have Home Depot and guaranteed someone would put in a mall if we wanted it. She thought we should expand the Center Mall and decide what we want Kalispell to look like in 1 to 20 years. She said she hated Missoula and Spokane and thought we were about to shoot ourselves in the foot. Diane Conradi, Citizens For A Better Flathead, stated their charge was not the mall, but looking at the location, which was 250 acres on a critical aquifer. She questioned if this was the right place to handle intensive commercial development. She thought we needed to develop our own vision of the future instead of letting developers come in and direct it. She went through the Master Plan goals and Kalispell City Planning Board Minutes of the meeting of May 14, 2002 Paae 11 pointed out the ones this project was not consistent with. Economics; the Master Plan calls for a diverse economy and a healthy downtown. Conradi broke down the aspects of a healthy economy and spoke on those issues. One being jobs, stating retail growth destroys as many jobs as it creates. She said it was the job of the City to look at the impacts of how many jobs were created by new business verses how many will be shifted from existing business. Another economic element is the downtown core. When the downtown dies we lose who we are as a community. Also, it's very important for the City of Kalispell's tax base, because lands are valued much higher inside the city of Kalispell than in Evergreen. Therefore, the land underlying the mall in Evergreen will be of less taxable value. She said it was easy for a community to be glutted with commercial space, which creates a downward spiral and they are seeing it already. The taxpayers end up footing the bill. Conradi used Bozeman as an example, which has taken the stance that when stores empty they require the buildings to be leased or sold before they can move. Otherwise they end up with a hole in the tax base. She noted the City's current downward trend and suggested they question what the impacts would be. She said there were critical bits of information they needed to know about the longer -term costs of police, crime rates associated with malls, and how the outlying areas will pay their fare share. She noted the growth policy saying it was a legal issue, but that it did not change where they were proposing the mall and what happened with water run off from the parking lot, or what happened to Herbergers. She emphasized it would be located on a critical aquifer and the Flathead river runs 25 feet under it. She said a fast moving aquifer moves 2 feet a day and this one moves 4 inches per second. Any contamination in that area would be in Flathead Lake within a couple of days. She said she wasn't a hydrologist, but with that much pavement, battery acid, waste oil, and heavy metals it was critical to have an answer to that question. Pam Gerwe, spoke in opposition to the project stating the Dome posters were just as impressive. She encouraged the board to check every nook and cranny to make sure the project is what the developers said it was going to be. Marti Kurth, P.O.Box 907, Whitefish, had responses from 42 people who chose to not stay and talk tonight. She said the responses were signed comment cards saying the public and city of Kalispell needed more facts before an informed decision could be made about the mall. They further stated to please reject this Master Plan amendment, there is not enough information about the proposal to make an informed decision in the following areas; water quality, impacts to wells, adequate sewer service, impacts on traffic infrastructure, tax impacts on neighbors and residents, or Kalispell City Planning Board Minutes of the meeting of May 14, 2002 Page 12 impacts on the economics of downtown Kalispell. Kurth said she was submitting them as a representative of CFBF and she also submitted petitions signed by over 700 people who voted to expand the Kalispell mall instead of abandoning it to a proposal that is not thoroughly thought out. She asked those signatures be included in the public record. Marye Flowers, CFBF, reminded the board that in addition to traffic, storm water, and vision for the community, they had an obligation under the law to comply with additional burdens. She said they were responsible for putting together a set of facts to legally substantiate the decision they were being asked to make. She asked that they make sure they had adequate information to substantiate those facts. She said the public had a right to a clean and healthful environment for present and future generations. Flowers reiterated several facts regarding the aquifer, pollution to Flathead Lake, economic concerns, impacts of paving, increased risk of flooding, insurance risk, and water quality. She strongly encouraged the board to carefully craft a factual set of facts to base a decision on and then open it to another public hearing. No one else wished to speak and the public hearing was closed. There was a 5-minute recess. MOTION Atkinson moved and Spooner seconded to continue the agenda item until the next planning board meeting scheduled for May 28, 2002 so that the board could have time to review all materials and comments presented. ROLL CALL The motion passed unanimously on a roll call vote. KRDS PRELIMINARY PLAT A request by Thomas, Dean and Hoskins on behalf of KRDS APPROVAL FOR ISLAND for preliminary plat approval of the Island Subdivision, a 68- SUBDIVISION lot residential subdivision on 25.32 acres on the north side of Three Mile Drive approximately one half mile west of North Meridian Road. STAFF REPORT Narda Wilson, of the Tri-City Planning Office, gave a #KPP-02-2 presentation of staff report KPP-02-2, a request for preliminary plat approval of a 68-lot residential subdivision on approximately 25.32 acres in the northwest part of Kalispell. The property was recently annexed into the city of Kalispell and given a zoning designation of R-3, a Residential zone that is intended primarily for single-family homes. The subdivision would be developed in three phases over a period of time up to nine years. Phase 1 would be near the northeast portion of the site and would include 22 lots. Utilities would be taken from Sunset Court through a private easement. The extension of North Riding Lane would be Kalispell City Planning Board Minutes of the meeting of May 14, 2002 Pnaa 1 taken from Meadowland Subdivision to Three Mile Drive during Phase 1. Phase 2 would be another 33 lots to the west and the final phase would be 13 lots that would be close to Three Mile Drive. North Riding Lane would be completed during Phase 3 by adding curb, gutter and sidewalk to the pavement. Wilson reviewed the findings of fact and recommended approval of the proposal subject to 16 conditions. She noted a modification to condition 7, with additional language stating the R-3 requirements be met with a 60 foot lot width and a minimum lot size of 7,000 sq. ft., exclusive of any surface utility or road easements. Wilson further noted they received a petition from the property owners in the Meadowland Subdivision to the north, which was passed out to the board. There was concern about the extension of North Riding Lane to Three Mile Drive and the potential increase of traffic. APPLICANT Mike Fraser, of Thomas, Dean 8s Hoskins, stated he was representing the developer. He said they thought it was a smart growth proposition that is next to the city with City services. He said it would add small, clustered lots. He referenced the petition from Meadowlands and explained they were giving them a second access and city services, such as fire protection and ambulance. He said they were providing this benefit at their cost. He felt it was a good project, the right project, in the right place. Fraser did not have any problem with the modification to Condition 7. He asked the board for consideration, since they were putting in full city services, sidewalks and lights, to let them put sidewalks on only one side since they had to put in street trees, which were expensive. They thought it was a good idea to develop the park, and a bad idea to bring in pedestrian access because it didn't go anywhere. There was no pedestrian network. He said they could attempt it, but it was not in the best interest to bring the path through. Spooner asked about a possible light on Three Mile Drive due to concerns about additional traffic. Wilson explained it was beyond the scope of the subdivision. She said there will be some improvements on Meridian Road, but they wouldn't ask the developer to mitigate that intersection. Spooner said she was concerned about traffic from the subdivision. Fraser said the subdivision was in the other direction and he believed the traffic peaks would not coincide with that of the school. Atkinson asked about phasing and fire hydrants. Fraser explained they had to do a detailed hydraulic analysis for the subdivision requirements to see if they have fire flow. If not they would have to loop in. This will happen prior to the buildings. Atkinson asked about street names. Fraser said the Kalispell City Planning Board Minutes of the meeting of May 14, 2002 Page 14 developer was in the process of suggesting new names. PUBLIC HEARING The public hearing was opened to those who wished to speak. PUBLIC COMMENT Andrea Kahn-Bomgardner, 163 North Riding Rd., spoke in opposition to the proposal. She said she welcomed progress, but had a true, vested interest in maintaining a quality of life for those raising children and those retired people who deserve a quiet neighborhood to enjoy their home. She took offense to a developer coming in and telling her this was in her best interest. She felt consideration must be given for established neighborhoods. They were not opposed to development on North Riding Lane, but were vehemently opposed to the connecting of North Riding Lane and Meadowlands Subdivision because of the narrow, small lane road. She felt it was dangerous to the children because the road was a narrow, unlit street, leaving no place to walk safely to the bus stop. In the winter there were mounds of snow and during garbage day it became a single lane. She thought the developer or the City would need to pay for widening of the road and lights in a four -block area to insure traffic could pass safely and children could be safe. She noted the upgrades to Three Mile Drive, but no mention of upgrades to North Riding. She said they had no compelling reason to connect these roads and wanted to preserve their neighborhood and quality of life. No one else wished to speak and the public hearing was closed. BOARD DISCUSSION Brechel asked about consequences if the road did not connect and Wilson answered there were compelling reasons, such as a more direct route for emergency services. She said Meadowlands had always planned to extend the road to Three Mile Drive. She added that the City standard required sidewalks, which would provide additional safety for children. Wilson stated they strive to provide a grid system with flow so it's not one way in and one way out because the police and fire departments don't like it. Jentz noted they heard a compelling argument from the Meadowlands residents that if two cars can't pass under the current access road into Meadowlands, then the current system isn't adequate. Anderson noted that by having the connection they would be improving the current situation. Wilson addressed the issue of sidewalks on one side of the street. She said that to eliminate sidewalks on one side the applicants should have applied for a variance. If a variance were requested, they would need some type of explanation Kalispell City Planning Board Minutes of the meeting of May 14, 2002 Page 15 and justification and it would be evaluated on that basis. She noted the City standard was for sidewalks on both sides. MOTION Anderson moved and Atkinson seconded to adopt staff report KPP-02-2 as findings of fact and recommend to the Kalispell City Council that the preliminary plat be approved subject to conditions of the staff report, with amendment to condition 7 to include service, utility, or road easements. BOARD DISCUSSION Van Natta asked and Wilson answered that she would add language to condition 13 to clarify that the fire access and suppression system shall be installed by the developer and approved by the fire department. Rice asked and Wilson answered that if Meadowland were to annex into the City the City might assist with an SID to do any improvements to the street. Rice said he was looking for someway they could get some help. Wilson said they should not get more traffic. Rice asked and Fraser answered they computed the $ 11,000 per acre based on purchase price. ROLL CALL The motion passed unanimously on a roll call vote. LES SCHWAS TIRE A request by Les Schwab Tire Centers for amendments to the CENTERS TEXT Kalispell Zoning Ordinance reducing setbacks in the I-1, AMENDMENT Light Industrial zoning district. STAFF REPORT Narda Wilson, of the Tri-City Planning Office,gave a #KZTA-02-2 presentation on staff report KZTA-02-2, a proposal to amend Section 27.26.030(e)(2), Parking in the front and side yard setbacks of the Kalispell Zoning Ordinance, to include the I- 1, Light Industrial, zone along with the B-1, B-2, B-3, B-5 and H-1 zoning districts, which allow vehicles to park within five feet of the front and side corner lot lines. Additionally, to amend Section 27.18.040(3) to reduce the rear setback requirement in the I-1, Light Industrial, districts from 20 feet to five feet. Wilson passed out a letter from LS Construction supporting the recommendation of staff. Upon evaluation based on statutory criteria staff recommended approval of the proposed text amendment. PUBLIC HEARING The public hearing was opened to those who wished to speak on the issue. PUBLIC COMMENT No one wished to speak and the public hearing was closed. MOTION Atkinson moved and Anderson seconded to adopt staff report KZTA-02-2 as finding of fact and, based on these findings, recommend to the Kalispell City Council that the Kalispell Zoning Ordinance be amended to include the I-1 and B-5 zone in Section 27.26.030(e)(2), to allow parking in the front Kalispell City Planning Board Minutes of the meeting of May 14, 2002 Page 16 and side yard setbacks within 5-feet and to reduce the rear yard setbacks in those districts from 20-feet to 10-feet. MOTION (AMENDMENT) Rice moved and Brechel seconded to amend staff report KZTA-02-2 to add a five-foot space between parking and setback to be a green landscape buffer. BOARD DISCUSSION Atkinson asked and Wilson explained the proposed expansion, showing curbing and two access spaces. She said it would all be different and it would go to site review. She added that they would put in the landscape buffer. ROLL CALL (AMENDMENT) The motion passed unanimously on a roll call vote. ROLL CALL (MAIN) The motion passed unanimously on a roll call vote. FLATHEAD VILLAGE A request by Flathead Village Greens, LLC for an initial GREENS ANNEXATION AND zoning designation of R-4, a Two -Family Residential district INITIAL ZONING upon annexation into the city of Kalispell. STAFF REPORT Narda Wilson, of the Tri-City Planning Office, gave a #IKA-02-4 presentation on staff report KA-02-4, a petition for annexation and an initial zoning designation of R-4, a Two - Family Residential district, on approximately 2.929 acres on the north side of East Nicklaus Avenue in Flathead (Glacier) Village Greens. The property received preliminary plat approval for Village Greens Phase XI, which will be submitted for final plat approval in a separate action. Currently the property is zoned County R-5, a Two -Family Residential district, under the Flathead County zoning Regulations. This report evaluates the appropriate assignment of a City zoning classification in accordance with Section 27.03.010(4) of the Kalispell Zoning Ordinance. The Kalispell City Council has annexed all other phases of the Village Greens development in a previous action with an effective date of November 1, 2001. This property will be annexed under the provisions of Sections 7-2-4601 through 7-2-4610, M.C.A., Annexation by Petition. Staff reviewed the findings of fact and statutory criteria, thus recommending approval of the request. PUBLIC HEARING The public hearing was opened to those who wished to speak on the issue. PUBLIC COMMENT No one wished to speak and the public hearing was closed. MOTION Atkinson moved and Brechel seconded to adopt staff report KA-02-4 as findings of fact and forward a recommendation to the Kalispell City Council to adopt R-4, Two -Family Residential, upon annexation. BOARD DISCUSSION There were no comments from the board. ROLL CALL The motion passed unanimously on a roll call vote. Kalispell City Planning Board Minutes of the meeting of May 14, 2002 PnFP 17 MELVIN F. POWELL A request by Melvin F. Powell for an initial zoning INITIAL ZONING UPON designation of R-4, a Two -Family Residential district, upon ANNEXATION annexation into the city of Kalispell. STAFF REPORT Narda Wilson, of the Tri-City Planning Office, gave a #KA-02-3 presentation of staff report KA-02-3, a petition for annexation and initial zoning classification of R-4, a Two - Family Residential so that he can connect to City sewer. The property is in the County zoning jurisdiction and is zoned County R-5, Two -Family Residential district. This property will be annexed under the provisions of Sections 7-2-4601 through 7-2-4610, M.C.A., Annexation by Petition. Staff gave an evaluation based on statutory criteria and recommended adoption of the findings of fact and initial zoning for the property upon annexation to be R-4, Two - Family Residential. PUBLIC HEARING The public hearing was opened to those who wished to speak. PUBLIC COMMENT No one wished to speak and the public hearing was closed. MOTION Atkinson moved and Anderson seconded to adopt staff report #KA-02-3 as findings of fact and recommend to the Kalispell City Council that the initial zoning for this property upon annexation be R-4, Two -Family Residential. BOARD DISCUSSION There was a brief discussion on the allowance of doublewides on this lot and whether it is contiguous to the City. ROLL CALL The motion passed unanimously on a roll call vote. OLD BUSINESS No old business was reported. NEW BUSINESS No new business was reported. ADJOURNMENT The meeting was adjourned at approximately 1:00 a.m. The next meeting of the Kalispell City Planning Board and Zoning Commission will be held on Tuesday, May 28, 2002. on Van Natta, Chairman of the Board aebbieis, Re&�RgSecretaary APPROVED as u_b_ m ed�orrected: rl ,'-�,102 Kalispell City Planning Board Minutes of the meeting of May 14, 2002 Page 18