09-14-99KALISPELL CITY -COUNTY PLANNING BOARD
MINUTES OF MEETING
SEPTEMBER 14, 1999
CALL TO ORDER AND Jean Johnson called the meeting to order at approximately 7:05
ROLL CALL p.m. Members present were: Rob Heinecke, Greg Stevens, Jean
Johnson, Joe Brenneman, Brian Sipe, Bill Rice, Don Mann, and
Donald Garberg. Don Hines was excused. Narda Wilson
represented the Flathead Regional Development Office. There
were approximately 22 people in the audience. It was explained
that Joe Brenneman had another commitment and would be
leaving the meeting by 7 p.m.
APPROVAL OF MINUTES On a motion by Stevens and seconded by Rice the minutes of
the meeting of August 10, 1999 were approved unanimously as
submitted on a vote by acclamation.
WEST VALLEY MASTER A request by J & F Construction and Vernon and Thelma
PLAN AMENDMENTJohnson for a master plan amendment to the West Valley
Neighborhood Plan to amend the land use designation on
approximately 112 acres from agricultural to suburban
residential.
STAFF REPORT Narda Wilson of the Flathead Regional Development office gave a
presentation on --staff report KMPA-99-2 in which staff
recommends that the proposal to amend the West Valley
Neighborhood Plan on 112 acres from Agricultural to Suburban
Residential and remove it from the West Valley Overlay District
be denied because it does not comply with the goals and policies
of the West Valley Neighborhood Plan. She stated that should
the planning board determine that the proposal is worthy of
favorable consideration, the staff would recommend the
alternate included in the staff report. This area is in both the
county and city zoning jurisdictions. The West Valley Land Use
Advisory Committee reviewed this application and they
recommended approval on a vote of three in favor, two opposed
and one abstention. The planning board is, charged with
determining the appropriateness of changing this parcel from an
agricultural to a suburban residential zoning jurisdiction. The
primary goal of the West Valley Neighborhood Plan is to preserve
agricultural land. Staff cannot find that this proposal complies
with the plan. If this proposal had water and sewer extended to
the site, staff could support the application, but due to
environmental constraints the staff cannot support this plan
with on -site sewer systems.
Don Garberg asked about the environmental concerns and
Wilson explained that she had spoken with the DW5AS iAey � '
O believe there will become a problem in the future if individual
on -site septic is allowed.
Stevens asked if on -site septic systems should be under
consideration when discussing master plans or amendments.
He stated that it should be under review during the subdivision
review process, not now. Wilson answered that staff believes
this would be a premature development without consideration of
city water and sewer extension. Stevens stated that it clouds
the issue of the appropriateness of the plan amendment to
consider septic systems in the discussion.
PUBLIC HEARING The public hearing was opened to those in favor of the petition.
PROPONENTS John Parsons, 725 9th Ave. West, spoke in favor of the
application for a master plan amendment. The West Valley
Land Use Advisory Committee has recommended approval of
this application. The area is going through changes and this
amendment will fit in with those changes. He stated that the
area is moving toward a more commercial use. The request is
for an R-2 zoning designation and this area supports residential
zoning. This will be the same type and quality of development
as Country Estates. He stated that the economy doesn't support
traditional farming and agricultural uses alone. He stated that
this plan includes 76% open space that will be required to be
kept in perpetuity.
Mike Frazer of Thomas, Dean & Hoskins spoke in favor of the
project stating that this is a master plan change, a first step in a
long process to develop this property. He stated that a master
plan change is the only consideration before the board. He
noted that this is an appropriate change because it is an
outgrowth of the adjacent development. He noted that the
developers are environmentally concerned and will make
decisions in favor of such.
Jack Emerson of J & F Construction spoke in favor of the
proposal stating that every home in the adjacent development
has a replacement drain field, as would this property.
Brent Johnson spoke in favor of the project stating that a
natural extension and organized growth make this a worthwhile
project. His family needs to diversify their holdings in order to
maintain their family farm.
Russell Crowder, representing Montanans for Property Rights,
spoke in favor of the project noting that this is only a
consideration on an amendment to the master plan, and that
environmental concerns are premature. He recommends
approval of the amendment.
OPPONENTS Bill Breen, 375 Mountain Meadow Road, spoke in opposition to
the plan amendment stating that the West Valley Plan was the
0 result of an 18-month effort and is barely two years old. It
Kalispell City -County Planning Board
September 14, 1999 Meeting Minutes
Page 2 of 8
reflects the area's desire to maintain agricultural use. He stated
that the committee was well aware of the adjoining
developments and they believed this is where the boundaries
should be drawn. He stated concern over the impacts to the
West Valley School District. He stated that amending the plan
violates the goals of the plan in order to suit one property owner
and would destroy the integrity of the plan.
David Van Dort, 777 O'Neil Creek Road, stated that the
committee's decision to recommend approval was not
unanimous. He has concern over the septic system density that
could harm the aquifer and that the developers have made no
attempt to assist the school with the impacts from development.
He stated that with the future extension of water and sewer
probable, individual septic systems is premature.
No one else wished to speak and the public hearing was closed.
BOARD DISCUSSION Stevens asked how many acres were encompassed by the
overlay district and was answered approximately 50,000. He
stated that this parcel containing 112 acres, along the boundary
of the district, is not of great impact to the district.
Sipe questioned the relationship of the number of property
owners in this 50,000-acre district to the number of people
responding to the creation of the district. No one had a figure to
present. He stated that he did not believe the creation of the
district should disallow the property owners right to develop his
or her land.
It was explained that a protest developed and failed during the
process of creating the West Valley Neighborhood Plan which
only garnered about 15 percent after a door to door effort.
Johnson asked about the actions of the advisory committee and
how Van Dort and Breen felt about the committee and the
board. Breen answered that the committee was trying to
maintain integrity to the plan.
Stevens stated that as a board they have an obligation to explain
their thoughts and actions to the people. He stated that he
believes that the farming industry has no mechanism to
preserve and protect the agricultural land; the community in
essence is asking that the property owners to lose the potential
income from development of their property solely for the
community good. But the community is not willing to assist the
property owners in doing so. He stated that 112 acres out of a
-50,000 plus acre plan is not a large impact. Since this property
is right next to a development and the Johnson's need the
financial relief it would not be in the best interest for the board
�J to recommend denial of the amendment. He stated that if the
Kalispell City -County Planning Board
September 14, 1999 Meeting Minutes
Page 3 of 8
neighborhood felt such a need to preserve this as agricultural
n land then they should get together and pay for a conservation
easement so that the owners did not lose in the process.
Heinecke stated that he sees it as the Johnson's right to
withdraw from the neighborhood plan and overlay district and
he believes they should be allowed to do so.
MOTION Garberg moved and Heinecke seconded to recommend to the
Kalispell City Council and the Board of County Commissioners
that the proposal to amend the West Valley Neighborhood Plan
by removing 112 acres from the West Valley Overlay District be
approved because it does meet the goals and policies of the
Kalispell City County Master Plan; and recommend that this
property be removed from the West Valley Neighborhood Plan
area and be brought wholly under the Kalispell City -County
Planning jurisdiction; and direct the staff to prepare a resolution
approving the map amendment for the president's signature to
be presented to the City Council and the County
Commissioners. On a roll call vote all members voted Aye. The
motion passed unanimously.
ARICO / RIVER PLACE A request by Arico for approval of a Planned Unit Development
SUBDIVISION, PLANNED on property in the Evergreen and Vicinity Zoning District, which
UNIT DEVELOPMENT includes a zone change from R-1 to R-2 on approximately 34
AND ZONE CHANGE acres and a Planned Unit Development overlay for approximately
0 54 acres planned for River Place Subdivision.
STAFF REPORT Wilson gave a presentation on staff report FPP-99-8 / FPUD-99-
1 in which staff recommends that the Planned Unit
Development, zone change, and preliminary plat be approved
subject to 20 conditions. She stated that rezoning
approximately 34 acres from R-1 to R-2 is requested, along with
a PUD overlay, which will allow some flexibility to the design.
Staff feels that this is a good plan and it addresses the
neighborhood's concerns, although it is not as dense as, staff
would like to see because the infrastructure is already available
in the area. The density proposed under this PUD is far less
than what is possible in the zoning district. Staff recommends
that some of the covenants, River Place Subdivision
Requirements (a-k), be required to be placed on the face of the
plat. She stated that the intent of a Planned Unit Development
is not only to allow the developers more flexibility in their
design, it is also to allow the public an assurance of how the
development will be designed and what standards will be
followed. This proposal is in general compliance with the Master
Plan. Staff asked that condition two be amended to allow final
phasing to be determined by the utility design.
PUBLIC HEARING The public hearing was opened to those in favor of the petition.
Kalispell City -County Planning Board
September 14, 1999 Meeting Minutes
Page 4 of 8
PROPONENTS Jeff Larsen spoke in favor of the application stating that the
Commissioner's had concerns about the storm drain plan, so he
completed a design plan that would hold double the potential for
storm water. He asked that condition five only reference that
there are covenantsand in condition 12 strike the requirement
for the developer to make improvements prior to platting and
leave this up to the, homeowners to decide how the park will be
developed.
Al Sylling spoke in favor of the project stating that the
developers were in general agreement with the conditions but
would like some amendments as follows:
# 12 strike prior development to the parks but leave the
provision for irrigation;
# 10 clarify the 20-foot buffer zone requirements;
#3 delete the landscape boulevard, the developers will delineate
and mark a bike/pedestrian path.
He stated that the developers have made an attempt to address
the concerns of the Commissioners and the neighbors and have
reduced the density by approximately 50%. He asked that the
board support the application.
Fred Ricketts, representing the property seller, spoke in favor of
the project stating that the owner needs the income from the
property. This development will allow for needed affordable
housing and would benefit the community.
Christa Martins, 327 Cottage Lane, spoke in favor of the project
stating that the covenants are recorded and of public record and
are not needed to be on the face of the plat. She suggested 100
trees in the buffer zone. She stated that this is an excellent
project for the community.
No one else wished to speak and the public hearing was closed.
BOARD DISCUSSION Garberg asked Mr. Sylling to clarify what he wanted changed on
condition three and it was explained that the developers wanted
to mark and sign a bike/pedestrian path rather than have a
separation by a landscape boulevard.
Heinecke asked and was answered that there are no
requirements for off -site parking in the residential zoning.
Rice stated that the board could amend the conditions. He
stated that the setbacks and bike .path are okay with him. He
would like to see what development would be required in the
designated park areas, and it was answered that the developers
are working up the numbers on the Homeowner's Association
dues so that the park development would be;covered.
�J
Mann asked about the affordability of the lots with this new plan
Kalispell City -County Planning Board
September 14, 1999 Meeting Minutes
Page 5 of 8
and it was explained that the developers were able to keep the
�1 smaller lots in the desired range because the amenities such as
sidewalks, lighting, etc. were removed from the plan.
Heinecke asked about costs associated with the water and sewer
and it was explained that it would cost approximately $2,000
per lot, which is included in the building permit costs.
Rice stated that he agreed with deleting condition five.
Johnson asked and was answered that the right of way on River
Road is 30 feet. Johnson wanted it on the record that Evergreen
water and sewer is currently available to the property and the
there are adequate facilities at the school to handle the impacts.
He noted that the board unanimously recommended the prior
application, which he preferred, and the community is losing
amenities and safety in order to accommodate the lower density
for the Commissioners.
Wilson stated that the development standards are the only
portion of the covenants that staff wants on the face of the plat.
She stated that the county cannot enforce covenants but can
enforce conditions on the face of the plat. Maintaining some
form of design standards in order to meet the Planned Unit
Development criteria is what staff was going for with this
condition, noting that the purpose of the PUD is to regulate
design standards.
Rice agreed with the design standards but noted that (b) of those
standards should read in accordance with `Flathead County
regulations' not the Cities.
When asked Sylling stated that even less people see the plat
than see the covenants and he is unsure of the reason for
placing that part of the covenants on the face of the plat.
Wilson explained that the community is basing their support on
the plan as it has been presented and the only way to enforce
the design standards is by placing them on the face of the plat.
Garberg asked and Wilson clarified that the intent of a Planned
Unit Development is to give flexibility to the developer in
exchange for the predictability on how, and by what standards,
the property is developed.
Rice asked staff if there was any way the board could increase
the allowed density, and Wilson explained that the plan was
advertised as presented to the board and it would not be in
keeping with public notice to substantially change the plan.
Heinecke stated that he does not have a problem with allowing
Kalispell City -County Planning Board
September 14, 1999 Meeting Minutes
Page 6 of 8
the developers to leave the park area development up to the
homeowner's association.
MOTION Heinecke moved and Sipe seconded to adopt staff report FPUD-
99-11 / FPP-99-8 as findings of fact and, based on these
findings recommend to the Board of County Commissioners that
the Planned Unit Development, zone change, and preliminary
plat be approved subject to the 20 conditions as amended by the
board.
Heinecke moved and Garberg seconded to amend condition 12
by striking 'landscaping, play equipment and' from the last
sentence. On a vote by acclamation the motion to amend the
condition passed unanimously.
Garberg moved and Sipe seconded to amend condition five to
include the language; "A note shaU beplaced o_the Ace of
the fi • l plat —s hie a inetudes the fang ag-v----- iftv---the
covenants under the section "River Place Subdivision
Requirements" section
(b) shall be amended which allows a five foot side yard
setback on Lots 26 through 65". On a vote by acclamation
the motion to amend condition five passed unanimously.
On a roll call vote on the main motion to recommend approval of
r the application: Heinecke, Garberg, Mann and Sipe voted Aye.
Stevens, Johnson and Rice voted No. The motion to recommend
approval of the Planned Unit Development, zone change and
preliminary plat with amended conditions passed on a vote of
four in favor and three opposed.
The board discussed their disappointment with the lower
density of the plan and the loss of amenities in order to meet the
wishes of the Commissioners. They agreed that this is not the
most appropriate use of the land because the density is not in
accordance with the allowable zoning and infrastructure. They
agreed that the developers had had to withdraw the sidewalks
with curbs and gutters, street lighting, and other amenities,
which would have allowed for a safer and more improved plan,
in order to keep the costs down so that they can continue to
offer affordable lots and housing. The members that voted
against the petition wanted it noted that they were not against
the subdivision, but were against the lower density and loss of
amenities with this plan.
Due to the board's agreement on their disappointment of the
previous plan being denied, the lower density of this plan and
the loss of amenities and safety because of it; Garberg moved
and Heinecke seconded that staff be directed to write a letter, to
be signed by the President and mailed under separate cover, to
�J the Commissioners citing their disappointment. On a vote by
Kalispell City -County Planning Board
September 14, 1999 Meeting Minutes
Page 7 of 8
acclamation the motion to have a letter sent to the
Commissioners passed unanimously.
NEW BUSINESS Because there will be at least five or six items on the agenda for
the October meeting the board agreed to have the October
meeting start at 6 p.m.
OLD BUSINESS The master plan review process is winding down. Two meetings
to go over the plan and the map will be needed and then the
board should schedule a public hearing. There will be a meeting
next Tuesday, September 21st, at 7 p.m., if a member cannot
attend they are asked to write or fax their comments so that
Wilson can incorporate them in the meeting and possibly in the
final draft.
Stevens stated that the growth management changes should be
included in the draft and had not been to this point.
ADJOURNMENT The next regular meeting will be October 12, 1999 at 6 p.m. The
meeting was adjourned by motion at approximately 8:40 p.m.
can A. (4in66n, President
bl
Approved as submitte corrected: 99
Laske, R96Arding Secretary
Kalispell City -County Planning Board
September 1411999 Meeting Minutes
Page 8 of 8