09-10-96KALISPELL CITY -COUNTY PLANNING BOARD
AND ZONING COMMISSION
MINUTES OF MEETING
SEPTEMBER 10, 1996
CALL TO ORDER The regularly scheduled meeting of the Kalispell City -County Planning
AND ROLL CALL Board and Zoning Commission was called to order at 5:35 p.m. by
President Therese Hash. Board members present were Walter Bahr, Milt
Carlson, Jean Johnson, Fred Hodgeboom, Michael Conner, Robert
Sanders, and Therese Hash. Excused absences were Joe Brenneman and
Pam Kennedy. The Flathead Regional Development Office was
represented by Narda Wilson, Planner II, and Steve Kountz, Senior
Planner. There were six (6) people in the audience.
APPROVAL OF The minutes of the meeting of August 13, 1996 were approved as written
MINUTES on a motion by Bahr, second by Carlson. .All members present voted
aye.
BIBLER & Hash introduced the next item on the agenda which was a review of a
HARRINGTON proposed conservation easement from Sam Bibler and John Harrington
CONSERVATION to the Montana Land Reliance to be placed on approximately 94 acres of
OEASEMENT property located in the Lower Foys Lake area. The property is in the
Lower Side Zoning District west of Foys Lake Road. The property is
located in Section 23, Township 28 North, Rante 22 West, P.M.M.,
Flathead County.
Staff Report Wilson presented an overview of the bequest of a conservation easement
by Harrington & Bibler, Inc. over 94 acres of land located in the Lower
Foys Lake area. The conservation easement would further the goals and
policies of the Kalispell City -County Master Plan and staff recommended
the Board support the conveyance.
Motion Carlson made the motion that the Planning Board authorizes the Planning
Director to act on their behalf by stating to Montana Land Reliance that
the conservation easement will furhter the goals of long-range planning
and the Planning Board is in full support of the conveyance of
conservation easement #FCE-96-03. Conner seconded. By acclamation
vote, all members present voted aye.
SOUTH Next, was an update on the South Woodland / Greenacres Neighborhood
WOODLAND / Plan. This is not a public hearing, but a distillation of what has been
GREENACRES gleaned from the series of neighborhood meetings that have been held. A
O NEIGHBORHOOD memorandum and a draft plan were included in the packet.
PLAN UPDATE
Staff Presentation Wilson gave a brief background and reviewed some of the issues that are
in the area, some of the goals that reflect the neighborhood's desires, and
a basic outline of how we anticipate proceeding with this. Four of the
five scheduled meetings have been held. There has been good
participation, with an average of 80 people at these meetings. From the
information received at these meetings, specific issues have been
identified. The City's consideration to annex the community has been
very difficult to separate from the plan. It is somewhat fortunate that the
neighborhood planning efforts are going on concurrently with the
annexation, as it is providing a forum for the neighborhood to identify the
issues they deem most important, and establishing goals and policies to
mitigate the concerns without increased costs. Wilson went through the
details of the five (5) primary issues, and summarized the corresponding
goals of the majority of the property owners.
Board Discussion Jean Johnson, has been working on lots in the area that have failed septic
systems. He was a speaker at one of the neighborhood meetings. He
gave the Board an explanation of the drainage situation.
O He thinks that if we can reduce the effluent moving through the two
impermeable clay surfaces, we can take care of most of the drainage
problems. The State is aware of the problems, but can't say anything
until there is a failure. I think that getting annexed into the City will
improve the quality of the neighborhood, and water quality. You can see
a deterioration of the neighborhood, primarily because of the conditions
that exist. Low impact mitigation would be to have lagoons for drainage
with cattails and other plants that will clean the water. Limiting the
source would help. All the surface water runoff from Kalispell drains
into this neighborhood, where there are soil limitations due to the clay
layers.
Conner asked whether this was a point source pollution into the
Stillwater River? We know the slough is getting it.
Johnson stated that there are alternatives to dumping it in the Flathead
River, and possible funding sources to assist in wetland restoration.
There was discussion on the focus of attention on these drainage issues,
and potential solutions. If we can move forward with this, there could be
some real improvements in the area.
Public Comment The meeting was opened to those wishing to comment on the draft
neighborhood plan which was submitted to the Planning Board.
2
Patti Vashlow, 837 Stag Lane, wanted to clarify what she is hearing,
having lived in the area for 13 years. She stated that the sewer will not
solve the drainage problems. That is part of the solution, but is not the
cure-all. Each portion of the neighborhood has unique issues. West of
South Woodland is not so much a sewer issue, but impermeable layers
and surface runoff. East of South Woodland, is indeed sewer drainage. I
watched the water this spring come from the northwest, and the yard
filled from the northwest to the southeast. If you clear up the problem of
surface drainage in one area, you will put that surface drainage into the
slough, which raises the slough level and floods my neighbors' yards. A
solution has to be neighborhood wide. We are a strong neighborhood
out there, and we will survive or sink, as a neighborhood.
I do take exception to the statement about the deterioration of the
neighborhood. We have long been looked at as a neighborhood that
never should have been, and we are getting feisty about it. I told Pam
Kennedy to look at this neighborhood for the income it represents. You
can't find a more consistent neighborhood, where everyone is working
and no one is on welfare. We have come a long way, we have beautiful
yards, and are proud of our neighborhood.
OAnother thing, on Kelly Road, it is not the Pepsi trucks that are the
problem. That road is used as the short cut. There are a lot of kids in our
area. Let's not get to the point where we kill one of those kids before
something is done about it.
Dennis Storge, 1696 Stag Lane, president of the homeowner's
association, said they have lived there 5 years. All of the problems out
there have something to do with water, either surface drainage, sewage,
or our water supply system. We have got to do something to get the
slough back to its natural level and then keep that natural outlet. The
City put Main Street behind Scotty's Bar. The County filled in across
Willow Glen, it has been landlocked for many years. Each year the level
of the slough raises 2-3 inches, as more development occurs and the
water has no where to go. Five years ago, there used to be deer, turkeys
and ducks on the slough. The wildlife is no longer there. The water
stinks. It has to be looked at as an overall plan. The water supply
system was explained. We have a good source of water that can be
supplied to the area. One of the options in the City's original plan was to
install a water system out there at the cost of $1.25 million. We cannot
afford a new water system when we have a perfectly functional one.
Some of the options we have looked at is to have the City buy it from us,
or we deed it over to them, and attach our system to the City water
system, and not cost us. Other than the money it would cost us to be
3
annexed, everything else is a water issue. Also, it is especially unsafe for
bicyclists on South Woodland and Kelly Roads. We do not think that
sidewalks are necessary and we don't want them as we want to retain the
rural quality of the neighborhood. A bike/pedestrian path would be ideal.
Jo Martin, 1705 Bison, had considerable concern about the annexation
and if the whole area was going to be annexed or not. You have to look
at the entire picture to address the whole scope of the water problems.
Cindy Russell, 1723 Bison, agrees with the others, but those of us who
live on Bison do not have problems with our water and septics, because
we are on the hill.
There were no other comments, at this time.
Board Comments Johnson wanted to comment that in no means did he mean to suggest
that the neighborhood is deteriorated. I am suggesting that the quality of
life and value may increase when the drainage problem is taken care of.
There a number of different things that need to be done to address the
drainage problem. As to Bison Drive, I have worked on 3-4 houses on
Bison Drive for the government. In two of them, we cored the daylight
basements, and there was raw sewage coming up. Three of the houses
on Bison Drive have sophisticated alternating drainfields. That is not the
long range answer. Those lots are too small to have several drainfields.
I think you people have done a terrific job out there, making things grow
in that clay soil that would make anyone proud. One thing to be aware
of on the water system is that fire hydrants have to have an 8 inch line.
Other than that, the water system is great.
Carlson noted that the importance of a neighborhood plan is that we are
not looking at quick fixes, but long term planning for dealing with the
problems that will have some sustainability.
There was further discussion on the progress being made at the
neighborhood meetings. A draft plan will be going to the next
neighborhood meeting, and the public hearing on the Neighborhood Plan
is scheduled for the October Planning Board meeting.
MASTER PLAN The next item on the agenda was discussion of the Kalispell City -County
UPDATE Master Plan update.
Staff Report Kountz gave a presentation of the information included in the packet. A
draft outline was sent out for Board review. Several issues were noted
for further discussion, as set forth in his memo to the Planning Board.
�a
The Board discussed where the development is occurring around the
Kalispell jurisdiction, and reviewed a map of the current planning
jurisdiction, and potential expansion boundaries.
Kountz identified areas of research that could be beneficial. For
example, the development history in the current Master Plan is before
1900. Air quality, water quality, viewsheds, historic districts and
community character could be looked at. The growth that has occurred
in the county over the last several years, has been probably the biggest
concern. Master plans done in other areas have dealt with quality of life
issues. They have tried to define character, and how growth has
destroyed the 'character of particular areas, more than just looking at land
use and compatibility. They look at the land use mixes, the architectural
patterns, the site design patterns, for the important natural historic
resources. That can be very helpful for an area that will continue to
grow. He asked for direction on what kind of research we should do.
Hash asked if the extensive map work done by Design Workshop could
be utilized without duplicating those efforts.
Kountz replied that we have not been able to use those maps, yet. They
are on a countywide scale. Breaking it down to a Kalispell scale, and
looking at it site by site, is a problem.
Staff suggested that a joint workshop meeting be held with the County
Commissioners regarding expansion of the planning jurisdiction.
The Board discussed the various options presented and agreed to meet
with the County Commissioners, first, to determine what direction to
take, and then meet with the City Council.
A joint meeting with the County Commissioners was decided upon to
meet on Monday, September 23rd at 11:00 a.m. at the Commissioner's
chambers.
Kountz asked if he should proceed with a survey? The Board asked
what would be gained that was different than the survey done by Design
Workshop?
Carlson replied that he worked four years on the County process, with
the CPC and Design Workshop. The survey was a wish list. There was
not enough information out there, and these questions were thrown out
into the blue and we got a beautiful wish list, with water quality #1, air
U quality #2. Putting it into regulation or anything else caused a complete
furor. If the research document had been prepared ahead of time, and
5
promulgated as a basis of fact for people to look at and then answer
questions, it would have been a much better process. The survey would
have been more meaningful, with more support and buy -in by the general
public. The general public will take apart anything that. is put out, unless
they find some ownership in parts of it. We came to the end and it was
destroyed by 18% of the voting public. At all the public hearings by
Design Workshop, they felt that something was being forced down their
throats. They carried that attitude all through the rest of the plan. What
Steve [Kountz] did in Whitefish, was get quite abit of information out to
the people beforehand, before any survey went out. The people were
informed on what the facts of the matter were. The County plan was all
innuendo, unbased fact being thrown out at meeting after meeting.
Nothing was accomplished. I think we can do a much better job by
having the public informed, and having them tell us what they think. I
would recommend putting a public opinion survey out after the research
and resource documents have been prepared, and put out in draft. I think
a survey is very important. In '93 the county was dealing with county
issues and concerns, so the answers from city residents were different
than from the county as a whole.
Kountz felt that is was of value in Whitefish. An 8-page flyer was put
out in the newspaper, which was basically a synopsis of the Master Plan.
If there are specific issues that are hot spots that should be addressed,
this is a good chance to get public opinion on them. Public participation
is a very important part of a plan update process, and it is very difficult to
get.
Conner agreed with Carlson. He suggested that staff package something
for the Board to review, much like what he did in Whitefish.
There was further discussion on the survey process.
OLD BUSINESS There was no old business.
NEW BUSINESS Carlson announced a workshop to be held Saturday, September 14th at
the Flathead Valley Community College on "What is the Role of Local
Watersheds?"
He also handed out an informational packet put out by the Montana
Environmental Information Center on "Takings".
There was no other new business.
rol
ADJOURNMENT There being no further business to discuss, the meeting was adjourned at
7:20 p.m.
Therese Fox Hash, President
i
APPROVED:
*Eliethtko, Recording. Secretary