06-08-99KALISPELL CITY -COUNTY PLANNING BOARD
MINUTES OF MEETING
JUNE 8, 1999
CALL TO ORDER AND The meeting was called to order by Jean Johnson at approximately
ROLL CALL 6:03 p.m. Members present were: Rob Heinecke, Greg Stevens,
Jean Johnson, Don Hines, Brian Sipe, and Bill Rice. Joe
Brenneman arrived at 6:07, being present for the Nurturing Center
staff report. Donald Garberg arrived at 6:51, being present for the
Ranchview Subdivision staff report. Don Mann was absent. The
Flathead Regional Development Office was represented by Narda
Wilson. There were approximately 11 people in the audience.
APPROVAL OF On a motion by Stevens and seconded by Heinecke, the minutes of
MINUTES the meeting of May 11, 1999 were approved unanimously as
submitted on a vote by acclamation.
NURTURING CENTER A request by The Nurturing Center for a text amendment to the
TEXT AMENDMENT parking standards for day care facilities and the definitions of day
care uses.
STAFF REPORT Narda Wilson of the Flathead Regional Development Office gave a
presentation of staff report KZTA-99-5 in which staff supports the
amendment to the parking standard for family day care homes and
the amendment to the definitions of family day care homes, day
care centers, and day care facilities with the added language that
would also include adult day care as well as child day care in the
definitions. Staff recommends that the Kalispell City -County
Planning Board recommend to the Kalispell City Council that the
zoning ordinance amendments to the parking standards for day
care and definitions of day care be approved.
PUBLIC HEARING The public hearing was opened to those in favor of the petition.
PROPONENTS Susan Christofferson, Executive Director of the Nurturing Center,
spoke in favor of the petition stating that the amendment request
was due to the need for the zoning ordinance to be more in sync
with the Montana State Statutes.
No one else wished to speak and the public hearing was closed.
BOARD DISCUSSION The board briefly discussed the petition and public comment.
MOTION Stevens moved and Hines seconded to adopt staff report KZTA-99-
5 as findings of fact and, based on these findings, recommend to
the Kalispell City council that the amendments, as follows, be
approved.
Section 27.37.010(69), Day Care,
o ehildren or handieapped, disabled
or elder4y ad?alts net r-ela-ted by bleed er- marriage and net the leg,4
ward of the- attendant adult. —Family =day Bare home-6rgr—eup day
Kalispell City County Planning Board
Minutes of meeting June 8, 1999
Page 1 of 12
e-are-hemes (see MGA) Faust be register-eddA4th the
appropriate
sate-ageney. Centers-(12 ea more indi�C individuals) a s) must 1-.e heell�
by the- pprepriate- state -agene3A use which means care for
\� children or adults other than the parent or other person living
with the individual on a regular basis for daily period of less than
24 hours whether that care is for daytime or nighttime hours.
Regular basis means providing supplemental care to separate
families for three or more consecutive weeks. Family daycare
home means a place in which supplemental care is provided to
three to six children or adults on a regular basis. Group dam
home means a place in which supplemental care is provided to
seven to 12 children or adults on a regular basis. Day care center
means a place in which care is provided to 13 or more children or
adults on a regular basis.
Section 27.26.050(15), Off Street Parking for Day Care Home, Day
Care Center, Group Day or Nursery School: One -space- per-
teacher- / employee erg -tire -largest -shift plus -one -off street 1,.a
spaee per six students. One space per teacher / employee plus
one loading space per six students with a maximum of two
loading spaces to be provided on the street in front of the
property where the facilities are located. On a roll call vote all
members present voted Aye. The motion to recommend approval
of the amendments passed unanimously.
BERGER ANNEXATION A request by David R. and Deanne Berger for annexation and
& INITIAL ZONING initial zoning of R-4 on approximately 0.62 acres north of Belmar
Subdivision.
STAFF REPORT Narda Wilson gave a presentation on staff report KA-99-4 in which
staff recommends that the board recommend to the Kalispell City
Council that the initial zoning for this property should be R-4, Two
Family Residential, upon annexation. She noted that the
applicants own approximately 5 acres, most of which is in the 100
year floodplain. The area included in the request for annexation is
not in the 100 year floodplain but is in the 500 year which
provides a building site.
PUBLIC HEARING The public hearing was opened to those in favor of the petition.
PROPONENTS Dawn Marquardt, land surveyor for the applicants, spoke in favor
and made herself available to the board for .questions.
OPPONENTS Doug Young, Lot 11 Belmar Addition, spoke against the petition
stating that there are 3 people already using the 12 foot easement,
that is paved, and he would like to have the initial zoning for
single family residences rather than allowing a duplex as that
would allow 5 residents using that easement. He stated that there
are children in the area and he believes something should be done
with the road in order for it to be safe.
No one else wished to speak and the public hearing was closed.
Kalispell City County Planning Board
Minutes of meeting June 8, 1999
Page 2 of 12
BOARD DISCUSSION The board discussed the petition briefly and took public comment
into consideration.
l Heinecke asked if there were already duplexes on Lots 10 and 11
and was answered that there is a duplex on Lot 10, a single family
residence on Lot 11, and Dick Brady uses the road as access to
his pasture.
Johnson asked about access and it was explained that the 20 foot
easement across Lots 10 and 11 are the only access to this
property.
Breneman asked if they would have to widen the road if a duplex
was put on the subject property and was answered no.
Sipe asked if there were any other' access and was answered no.
Wilson noted that the property could not be further subdivided
because of the limited access to the site and therefore the most
that could be placed on the five acre property would be a duplex.
Brenneman noted that it could be spot zoning if any other zone
designation were to be placed on this property.
Wilson agreed and noted that it has been a matter of policy for
FRDO to recommend a zone such that is "consistent with an area
and the master plan and, based on that, R-4 appears to be the
n most appropriate zoning for this property. She also noted that
access is a problem all over the county. The existing access to this
property is not uncommon, even though it is not encouraged. She
stated that the applicants plan to place a single family dwelling on
the property, but the initial zoning should be consistent with the
area which allows for duplexes.
Stevens noted that he did not agree that other residential zoning
would be spot zoning, stating that single family or duplex is not
significantly different and there seemed to be no reason to change
the recommended zone on the property.
MOTION Breneman moved and Heinecke seconded to adopt staff report KA-
99-4 as findings of fact and, based on these findings, forward a
recommendation to the Kalispell City Council that the initial
zoning for the subject property should be R-4, Two Family
Residential, upon annexation. On a roll call vote all members
present voted Aye. The motion to recommend R-4 zoning upon
annexation passed unanimously.
CHANGE TO THE Sipe requested that the Schulze petition be moved to the end of
AGENDA ORDER the agenda as he knew that Schulze was planning to be at the
meeting. There was no opposition to that request.
LINDSAY ZONE A request by Walle and Mary Lou Lindsay for a zone change from
Kalispell City County Planning Board
Minutes of meeting June 8, 1999
Page 3 of 12
CHANGE RA-1 to B-3 on approximately 0.79 of an acre on the west side of
North Meridian Road and north of Two Mile Drive approximately
150 feet.
STAFF REPORT Narda Wilson gave a presentation of staff report KZC-99-2 in
which staff recommends that the board forward a recommendation
to the Kalispell City Council that the requested zone change from
RA-1 to B-3 be granted. She stated that the neighborhood plan
designates this as commercial property and this zoning would be
consistent with the area.
PUBLIC HEARING The public hearing was opened to those in favor of the petition.
PROPONENTS Walle Lindsay, the applicant, spoke in favor of the petition stating
that it would be a negative to keep the property RA-1 as the traffic
in the area would be dangerous for families with children.
No one else wished to speak and the public hearing was closed.
BOARD DISCUSSION There was no board discussion on this petition.
MOTION Stevens moved and Hines seconded to adopt staff report KZC-99-2
as findings of fact and, based on these findings, recommend to the
Kalispell City Council that the subject property be rezoned from
RA-1, Low Density Residential Apartment, to B-3, Community
Business. On a roll call vote all members present voted Aye. The
'J 0 motion to recommend the zone change passed unanimously.
PETERS PRELIMINARY A request by Robert Peters for preliminary plat approval of a 10 lot
PLAT residential subdivision on approximately 2.88 acres located west
of Grandview Drive and south of Commons Way in thenorth part
of Kalispell zoned RA-1.
STAFF REPORT Narda Wilson gave a presentation of staff report KPP-99-2 in which
staff recommends that the board forward a recommendation to the
Kalispell City Council that the preliminary plat be approved
subject to 14 conditions. She noted that this subdivision would
be consistent with what is in the area, adding that Grandview
Drive is designated as a collector street in the master plan and
would handle the increased traffic from this subdivision. She
stated that the developer is proposing cash -in -lieu of parkland.
She explained that the master plan designates this property as
high density residential and this subdivision meets the master
plan designation. She stated that staff would recommend that
condition #2 be amended to add sidewalks along Grandview Drive.
PUBLIC HEARING The public hearing was opened to those in favor of the petition.
PROPONENTS Jeff Larsen, project engineer, spoke in favor of the petition and
noted that the cash -in -lieu of parkland amount, based on the
County Assessor's Office, is high and the applicants will probably
take the option of an independent appraisal for the determination
Kalispell City County Planning Board
Minutes of meeting June 8, 1999
Page 4 of 12
of value. They ask that the sidewalk not be required on Grandview
as it would not be consistent with the area.
Milt Carlson, 375 Grandview Drive, spoke in favor of the petition,
stating that he lives directly across from the subject property, and
that he would like to see the storm water contained within the
subject property, and that he would be concerned that anything
more dense than this proposal would not be safe in the area. He
noted that this plan is a good design and he is in support of the
petition.
B. J. Carlson, 375 Grandview Drive, spoke in favor of the petition,
noting that there may be future problems with the traffic in the
area, and she noted that increased signing may be needed in the
future.
No one else wished to speak and the public hearing was closed.
BOARD DISCUSSION Stevens asked if when the Kalispell Public Works Department
assesses drainage requirements do they look at public comment or
how do they make their determination.
Wilson answered that there is a formula for flow calculations for
drainage off the property and a determination of what the current
runoff is and what would be generated after development. There is
also a requirement that 'no more storm water run off be allowed
than that which exists before development.
Stevens noted that if this subdivision were required to have
sidewalks it would be the only place in the area that would have
them.
Lloyd Dempsey, 145 Ridgeview Drive, stated that he has an acre in
the area and noted that the area is not consistent with high
density residential, and stated that this town has many homes for
sale so more homes are not needed, noting that there are 14
homes for sale in the community for $100,000 or less. He stated
that the residents of Kalispell should not have to pay for people
coming in from out of state and our own should be considered, we
don't owe out of state people anything and there should not be any
further subdivisions. We should try to live with what we have.
Stevens noted that the applicants have determined a use for their
property that enhances their welfare they should be able to do
such with their property in consistence with the planning of the
area.
Johnson noted that sidewalks on Grandview Drive would not be
consistent with the area.
Garberg asked if there could be a better access than Grandview
and could the approach be made wider or something that would
Kalispell City County Planning Board
Minutes of meeting June 8, 1999
Page 5 of 12
alleviate a potential bottleneck or traffic hazard?
Larsen noted that he believed that the 24 foot wide road and the
35 foot approach that are in the plans should be adequate and he
does not see a better way for the approach.
Johnson noted that a motion to accept the report as written would
exclude sidewalks from Grandview Drive.
MOTION Stevens moved and Rice seconded to adopt staff report KPP-99-2
as findings of fact and, based on these findings, recommend to the
Kalispell City Council that the preliminary plat for the Ranchview
Subdivision be granted subject to the following amended
condition: #8 provided aleng the—ea-stern—grepe-t-y b^undef°
between the subdivision and Grandview Drive. On a roll call vote
all members present voted Aye. The motion to recommend
approval of the Ranchview Subdivision subject to the amended
conditions passed unanimously.
SCHULTZE A request by George Schulze, aka Kal-Mont Dairy Farm, for
ANNEXATION & INITIAL annexation and initial zoning of B-1 on approximately 5.536 acres
ZONING on the northeast corner of Whitefish Stage Road and West
Evergreen Drive.
Sipe removed himself from the board for this petition due to a
personal interest in the outcome.
STAFF REPORT Narda Wilson gave a presentation on staff report KA-99-5 in which
staff recommends that the board forward a recommendation to the
Kalispell City Council that the initial zoning for this property
should be B-1, Neighborhood Buffer District, upon annexation.
Wilson noted that in addition to the request for annexation and
initial zoning, the property owner has filed for approval of a 5 lot
subdivision on this property which will be forwarded to the
Kalispell City Council for consideration at the same time as the
annexation and initial zoning. Because this is ,a minor
subdivision, 5 or fewer lots, it does not go before the planning
board. She stated that Sands Surveying has a corrected legal
description, which she did not have available for the board but will
be forwarded on to the city council before they take action on the
boards recommendation.
PUBLIC HEARING The public hearing was opened to those in favor of the petition.
PROPONENTS George Schulze, 1377 Whitefish Stage, spoke in favor of the
petition and noted that the sewer district had already been
petitioned and a favorable vote had been received to include this
property within the district.
OPPONENTS Karen Holmquist, 55 West Evergreen Drive, asked if this would
change the requirements to her property such as a requirement to
hook into city water and sewer services, an effect on their taxes, a
Kalispell City County Planning Board
Minutes of meeting June 8, 1999
Page 6 of 12
change in the ability to have their livestock, etc.
l --1 Wilson noted that in answer to Ms. Holmquist's questions, that
there would be no effect to her taxes or connection to the sewer
district or her use of her property and that any livestock would
have been grandfathered and there would be no change to that as
long as that use continued.
No one else wished to speak for or against the petition and the
public hearing was closed.
BOARD DISCUSSION Brenneman asked if this would completely surround the RA-1
section which could be annexed and Wilson stated that it could be
annexed but it won't.
MOTION Rice moved and Breneman seconded to adopt staff report KA-99-5
as findings of fact and, based on these findings, recommend to the
Kalispell City Council that the proposed property be zoned B-1,
Neighborhood Buffer District, upon annexation. On a roll call vote
all members present on the board voted Aye. The motion to
recommend B-1 zoning upon annexation passed unanimously,
with Sipe excused from the vote.
Sipe returned to his seat on the board.
CITY OF KALISPELL A request by the City of Kalispell for various amendments to the
ZONING ORDINANCE Kalispell Zoning Ordinance. These amendments would change
AMENDMENTS several areas of the zoning jurisdiction.
STAFF REPORT Narda Wilson gave a presentation of staff report KZTA-99-6 in
which staff recommends that the board recommend to the
Kalispell City Council that the amendments, as stated in the
report, be made to the Kalispell Zoning Ordinance. Wilson noted
that staff along with the City Zoning Administrator came forward
with many changes and that she determined that these changes
were all that were being brought out at this time. Later there will
be another request for `housekeeping zoning amendments'. She
went over each of the amendments individually explaining the
reasons for each. Wilson noted that staff is recommending that
bars, taverns, cocktail lounges, casinos, etc. all be placed in the
conditional use category.
Johnson noted that the board members should bring up any
amendment that they might have a problem with and that way the
board could move forward with those amendments which everyone
already agrees with, then those items which need further
consideration can be discussed.
PUBLIC HEARING The public hearing was opened to those in favor of the
amendments.
Craig Kerzman, Kalispell Building Official, spoke in favor of the
Kalispell City County Planning Board
Minutes of meeting June 8, 1999
Page 7 of 12
petition and stated that amendment item 1 would better suit the
current building standards and better serve the public.
No one else wished to speak and the public hearing was closed.
BOARD DISCUSSION The board agreed that items 1, 2, 3, 5, 6, 8, 9, 10 and 12 needed
no further discussion as they agreed with the staff
recommendations.
Item 4: Whether to place bars, taverns, cocktail lounges and
casinos as a conditional use. within all districts were they are
allowed.
Brenneman stated, and Garberg agreed, that taverns, bars, etc.
along with casinos should be moved to conditionally permitted
uses.
Stevens stated that he disagreed with adding bars, etc. to the
conditional use process and that there is no reason to add them as
the city has gotten along all right with them as permitted uses in
specific zones. He stated that there would be significant
opposition at public hearings if these uses were moved to
conditionally permitted uses and if the zones were established that
allow bars, etc. then there is no need to go further with it. They
should be left as they are.
Garberg noted that he believes that it is because of the
controversy and the need to allow the public a process to state
their concerns over these uses that these business should be
conditionally permitted uses.
Sipe noted that he would not want to have even higher restrictions
than what already is in place.
Wilson added that bars, etc. are conditionally permitted uses in
the County zoning regulations.
Sipe noted that by the same token if one has a casino then one
has a bar and why not add casinos to the permitted uses in those
districts where bars, etc. are already permitted.
Johnson stated that the County conditional use permits are
granted by the board of adjustment which is a quasi legal board
and there is no further recourse except the court system.
Wilson noted that a function of zoning is to separate incompatible
uses and limit uses with greater impact to certain areas.
Breneman noted that a basis for casinos as a conditional use is if
there are some statistics that show that adding a casino to a bar
C J� would in some way change the characteristic of the bar and the
impact to the neighborhood.
Kalispell City County Planning Board
Minutes of meeting June 8, 1999
Page 8 of 12
Stevens noted that because the legislature allows casinos with a
�l bar license using the zoning or conditional use process to keep
them out of the community is improper and that the fight to have
less of these businesses should be with the legislature. He stated
that nibbling on the issue of gambling through zoning takes away
from the head on consideration with the legislature.
Garberg noted that with controversial issues the public should be
allowed to have participation. He stated that the public has a
right to state their concerns over the controversial issues.
Wilson noted that zoning gives the local government some control
over state allowed issues without having to make it a state wide
issue when it is a local concern. She clarified that even though a
gaming license for 20 machines goes along with an on premise
liquor license in Kalispell the business is still required to obtain a
conditional use permit to have more than 5 machines. The
question is should that remain and should bars, etc. be included
in the conditional use permit category or should casinos be placed
in the permitted use category with bars, etc. This is what local
control is about, giving the community a say on where these
businesses are allowed.
Heinecke noted that by placing bars and casinos as conditionally
permitted uses then the public review is allowed and then if the
conditional use has merit it will pass through the boards and if
(\ ) not it will not be allowed.
Wilson reworded item 4 to read "Change bars, taverns, cocktail
lounges, and clubs to a conditionally permitted use in the B-2,
General Business District, and B-4, Central Business District and
couple with casinos. In the B-3, Community Business District, 13-
5, Commercial / Industrial District, and I-1, Industrial District,
add casinos as a conditionally permitted use in the same
categories as bars, taverns, cocktail lounges, and clubs. All of
these uses would be listed in the same category and would read
bars, taverns, cocktail lounges, clubs and. casinos."
Johnson asked for a show of hands on Item 4 and the board was 5
to 3 in favor of the staff recommendation to place casinos, bars,
etc. in the conditionally permitted use category as amended and
read by Wilson.
Item 7: Add a new section under Supplementary Regulations:
Svecial Events: Snecial events such as car shows, boat shows, RV
shows, carnivals, concerts and similar outdoor activities mau be
permitted in the "B," "1," and `Y' zones provided then do not exceed
seven daus in the three month period..
(„) Craig Kerzman stated that this amendment would give the
building department guidance on allowing temporary uses. These
Kalispell City County Planning Board
Minutes of meeting June 8, 1999
Page 9 of 12
special events are not accessory uses or listed as permitted uses
in those zones and so the only category they can be placed in is
temporary uses. He noted that for allowed frequency it would be
up to the board.
Sipe asked if these types of activities were causing any problems
and was answered that at this time there had been no problems
associated with these temporary special events.
Wilson explained that the current process to allow these
temporary special events is to go through the conditional use
permit process going from the Flathead Regional Development
Office, to the planning board and then to the council before they
can lawfully take place. She stated that this .is cumbersome and
time consuming for such short events.
The board discussed having these allowed more often than seven
days in a three month period. They were in agreement that they
could be allowed more often in that many of these events enhance
the community.
By unanimous board consensus item 7 was amended to "seven
days in a one month period".
Item 11: Amend Section 27.37.010(179), Definitions, Professional Office,
insert This would also include, but not be limited to, title companies, travel
agencies, insurance companies, real estate offices,...
Wilson read and clarified the current regulations, noting that
these businesses had been left out by oversight and the "but not
limited to" clause gives some flexibility.
The board agreed by unanimous consensus to accept the
recommendation as written by staff.
Item 13: Amend Section 27.26.050, (30), Off -Street Parking,
Medical and Dental Offices. This would allow for one space per
each 200 feet of floor area.
Wilson noted that there is actually a book that gives parking
requirements based on specific uses, and this book has been
researched by staff. The staff believes that the current city
regulations generally require too much parking. This amendment
would lessen the required parking, make the regulations
consistent, and allow what they have found to be acceptable
parking requirements.
By a show of hands the board unanimously agreed to accept item
13 as recommended by staff.
Item 14: Amend Section 27.26.050, (16) and (17), Drive in
Kalispell City County Planning Board
Minutes of meeting June 8, 1999
Page 10 of 12
Restaurants and Fast Food Restaurants. Combine these uses and
call them Drive -Through and Fast Food Restaurants with the
parking requirements stated as: On space per 80 square feet of
gross floor area plus on space per employee on the largest shift.
Wilson explained that the current requirement of one space for
every 50 feet of floor space is excessive, and that stacking spaces
should be considered. Stacking spaces is the number of cars in
the drive through, such a one car waiting, one at the order
window, another car and then one at the pick up window so that
there are no cars out in the street.
Johnson explained that an example is that the current regulations
have Pizza Hut and Taco Bell as the same type of business and
require the same parking, and that fast food drive through
restaurants, such as Taco Bell predicate their volume on stacking
spaces not parking as they are moving the customers through in a
very short period of time.
The unanimous board consensus was to amend the
recommendation to 100 feet and a minimum of four stacking
spaces.
Item 15: Move section 27.34.030(8) to a new Section 27.34.040
and renumber, call it Administrative Conditional Use Permit.
O Garberg stated concern when bureaucratic or administrative
decisions are made. He noted that policy should be made by
elected officials.
Wilson explained that this regulation is to allow the zoning
administrator the power to issue an administrative conditional use
permit on a request to expand on an already granted conditional
use permit by 25 percent which substantially complies with the
conditions already placed by the original permit.
Stevens stated that he was satisfied with the recommended
amendment because the use is going to remain the same as the
original conditional use permit and 25 percent is not a huge
expansion and the administrative conditional use permit will have
to comply with the conditions placed on the existing conditional
use permit.
The board unanimously agreed with the staff recommendation.
MOTION Breneman moved and Sipe seconded to adopt staff report KZTA-
99-6 as findings of fact and, based on these findings, recommend
to the Kalispell City Council that the staff recommended
amendments, as amended by the board, be made to the Kalispell
Zoning Ordinance, with the understanding that the board
CJdiscussion on item 4 is conveyed to the city council. On a roll call
vote all members present voted Aye. The motion to recommend
Kalispell City County Planning Board
Minutes of meeting June 8, 1999
Page 11 of 12
the board amended amendments passed unanimously.
NEW BUSINESS There was no new business presented.
OLD BUSINESS Tuesday, June 15, 1999 there will be a meeting dealing with the
master plan.
ADJOURNMENT
Breneman asked how to find out about council action on board
recommendations. It was noted that it could be gotten from the
newspaper, council minutes or they could call Wilson at FRDO.
The next meeting will be July 13, 1999, and will begin at 6 p.m.
The meeting was adjourned by motion at approximately 9:18 p.m.
Approved a ubmi�/� orrected: /99
Tricia L ske ecording Secretary
Kalispell City County Planning Board
Minutes of meeting June 8, 1999
Page 12 of 12