04-11-95KALISPELL CITY -COUNTY PLANNING BOARD AND ZONING COMMISSION
MINUTES OF MEETING
APRIL 11, 1995
CALL TO ORDER The regularly scheduled meeting of the Kalispell City -County
AND ROLL CALL Planning Board and Zoning Commission was called to order at 7:00
p.m. by President Therese Hash. Board members present were
Walter Bahr, Robert Lopp, Milt Carlson, Pam Kennedy, Bob Sanders,
Fred Hodgeboom and Therese Hash. Michael Fraser and Mike
DeGrosky had excused absences. The Flathead Regional
Development Office was represented by John Parsons, Senior
Planner. The City of Kalispell was represented by Brian Wood,
Zoning Administrator. There were approximately 50 people in
attendance.
APPROVAL OF The minutes of the March 14, 1995 were deferred, as they were not
MINUTES for distribution.
WESTERN
The first public, hearing was on a request by Western Montana
MONTANA
Health Center for approval of a Conditional Use Permit to allow a
HEALTH CENTER
transitional residential support housing facility. This facility is
CONDITIONAL
to assist adults with mental illnesses in a residential setting where
USE PERMIT /
they can learn the skills necessary to live independently. The
COMMUNITY
property is located approximately 150 feet south of 12th Street
RESIDENTIAL
East on the east side of 2nd Avenue East. The address is 1225
FACILITY
2nd Avenue East. The site is described as Lot B of Block 213,
Kalispell Addition in the SW4 of Section 19, Township 28 North,
Range 21 West, P.M.M., Flathead County, Montana.
Parsons announced that the applicant's representative, Pat Kent,
has requested a modification to the application to change the
request from a group home to a community residential facility.
Based on this request, staff recommended that the matter be
continued until the next scheduled meeting in May.
Hash asked if the change from a group home to a community
residential facility is substantial enough to rewrite the staff
report. Parsons said that no, -- under state law, the community
residential facility they are requesting by definition is a group
home. In the zoning ordinance, it lists them as two separate
conditional uses. It was applied for as a group home. Staff
report covers it both as a group home and a community
residential facility. There would be no change to the staff report,
the change would be in the legal advertising and the application.
Since there would be no changes to the staff report, the Board
directed Parsons to present the staff report.
Staff Report Parsons presented report
the statutory criteria ne4
recommended five (5) coi
conditional use permit.
#KCU-95-01. Based on th
e
The applicant's representative was asked to address the request
for a continuance. Patricia Kent, Director of Housing and
Development for Western Montana Mental Health Center, with
offices in Missoula, explained their request for a conditional use
permit to operate a community residential facility. The reason for
a continuance is perhaps our error. Within the profession and
within the state statute, we use the terms group home, community
residential facility, and other similar terms interchangeably, and
consider them synonymous. However, when we looked at the
zoning ordinance, it delineated several uses by conditional use
permit, and there is a distinction between a community residential
facility and a group home. We received a letter from the state
approving this facility, and it was specifically called out as a
community residential mental health facility, so in order to be
consistent with that state approval, we requested the continuance
to assure that the approvals given by this body would be
consistent with what has already been approved by the State.
John Parsons read the definitions of each of those terms as per
the Kalispell Zoning Ordinance.
Ms. Kent said they wanted to be clear that they are under the
provision of a community residential facility conditional use permit,
as opposed to the group home or foster care. They are willing to
provide testimony tonight or come back next month.
For the benefit of the audience and their own information, the
Board agreed by consensus to open the public hearing.
Public Hearing The public hearing was opened to those in favor of the requested
conditional use permit.
In Favor Patricia Kent, introduced Candace Butler, the Flathead Director of
the Community Support Programs, and John Lynn, Regional
Director. I would like to address any concerns that have arisen
with respect to the Mental Health Center's intent to apply for this
permit. It has been our intent from the very beginning that we
would get a conditional use permit. We got our State licenses
prior to applying for the conditional use permit, and it was
brought to our attention that we should not have delayed this
permit application process. The application is for a community
residential facility, and I realize there are different models in the
minds of mental health care professionals that make a great deal
of difference. With respect to the staff report, we concur with
the conditions, but are at difference with condition #2 that we
comply with Section 412 of the MCA. We believe that because we
are a community residential facility we are a permitted use within
the zone. What Section 412 does is state that if you wish to be
considered a residential use for zoning purposes, the facility must
provide for eight or less persons, and must provide 24 hour care.
Although, we do provide round-the-clock care that is available to
!\� those residents, we believe that we follow the definition of Section
411, and by right are permitted by conditional use permit in this
zone. This is probably confusing, but what I am trying to point
out' is that it really doesn't matter whether or not we are
2
�1 considered a residential use, we are permitted by conditional use
permit, as long as we meet the definition of Section 411.
Candace Butler, Director of the Flathead Community Support
Program with Western Montana Mental Health Center. She had
pamphlets available that describe the programs and she will try
to provide the details asked for. She read from written testimony
which is attached hereto as part of the minutes.
Richard Bucher, 1029 1/2 4th Avenue East, stated that I am one
of the clients of Lamplighter House. I live in my own apartment.
One of my concerns is what is going to happen to our clients if
this conditional use permit is not allowed to go through because
of opposition or concerns about people's safety. There is going
to be more concern for people's safety if this house is not put in
place, because we don't have anything else right now other than
inpatient care or at the Safe House for these people if they are
not allowed to live in this residential place. There is greater
safety if they are not there. There is plenty of history that
shows that these people -- most of these are the same people who
were at Harbinger House, which was a group home situation. The
neighbors there have talked to us and they all say that they miss
us at the old address, they have no concerns once they got to
know us, and know what kind of a place we ran there. If there
are people here who have concerns about their safety I would like
to recommend that they talk to the neighbors at the old Harbinger
House. I think they will find that we are a pretty decent group
of people and if we are a danger to anybody, it is more to
ourselves than anyone else. Most of us have learned that when
we need help where to go to ask for it before we become a
danger to ourselves. More often than not, we are more danger to
ourselves than to any other people. I hope that we get an
opportunity to show them that we can be likeable people and are
safe to be around, and we do have a purpose in this community.
Sylvia Houke, said I have lived at the T-House, and am now living
on my own. We have all voiced our opinions, and I think we have
all been heard, but nothing gets followed through with. I feel
like this is more of a play of politics and money, but what about
our lives? We need help more than labels.
John Lynn, Associate Director of Western Montana Mental Health
Center, said that tonight there will be a lot of testimony about
Harbinger House, which was our group home that operated in
Kalispell. There was a lot of opposition years ago when we tried
to establish Harbinger House. There was considerable and
significant opposition to that group home going into a
neighborhood in the first place. As Richard Bucher pointed out,
when we left that neighborhood, the neighbors had great things
to say about the clients that lived there. I would invite anyone
in the audience who has concerns about the population that we
serve, these people with mental illness that we serve, just speak
to those neighbors. One of the points is why did we leave
Harbinger House in the first place, that was a good program? It
is true, that was a good program. However, it was a program that
predated the Americans with Disabilities Act. It was building that
3
�} was not accessible. Our Board, made up of the County
Commissioners of the seven counties in Western Montana, toured
the building and had concerns about fire safety, as well. We
decided to move on and provide a model where clients could learn
independent living skills in a way that would encourage them to
move out into the community. We are not going to be taking
people who are dangerous into a residential area. One of things
we are talking about here is stigma and labelling. We are talking
about people's fears about mental illness, people's fears about
things they don't understand. That is unfortunate. We would
like to be helpful and share information. I think the best way to
learn about mental illness is to listen to the clients themselves.
Noel Joery, psychiatrist and Medical Director for Western Montana
Mental Health Center, 1740 Hwy 93 South, Kalispell. I have been
working for the Mental Health Center for 4 1/2 years, and have
experienced working with the system at Harbinger House and the
current system involving Independence House. Simply, from a
medical standpoint, the value of this type of living situation for
those with mental illnesses is proven, beyond a shadow of a
doubt. There are many such places of habitation throughout the
United States. I am proud to be a part of the very brief history
that Independence House has had in this community and I hope
you will continue to support the very good work and effort that
has gone into the construction of that house in the ongoing
development of programs that are connected with it.
There were no further speakers in favor of the proposal. The
public hearing was opened to those opposed to the requested
conditional use permit.
Opposition Bill Astle, 705 Main Street, attorney representing 15 adjoining
property owners, said in land use matters, it is often the case
that speculation of change or fear of change in a community,
whatever it may be, is quite often the fear. Speculating as to
what that fear may be, I have never been able to be very
accurate. Often times it is traffic impact on the residential
setting. In terms of the initial speakers anticipating opposition
to the mentally retarded, I want to start this appearance by
telling what I am not here for. What I am not here for and what
the people I am representing are not here for is any opposition
to the mental health, to the mentally ill, to the retarded, and their
presence in our community. I think that if the city had a lawyer
that ventured into that auspice, it would be so profound an error
on my part. What is ironic is the reputation in the state of
Montana for making the most blunderous error of errors in land
use law, was the City of Kalispell when opposing a group home.
It is a very clear lesson that when that home was opposed, the
District Court in Flathead said read the statute. It is clear that
no longer can this city or any city or county in the State of
Montana, prevent the advent of these type of homes. So, when
these people first contacted me I told them don't waste your
-� money on a lawyer. There is nothing that can be done because
the supreme law in the Montana legislature saw fit to do that. In
researching it, Montana was well beyond the tradition in this
country, in 1973, in adopting the law, because the mentally ill
4
r�-,\
were institutionalized. That was an error of this country and this
society, and it was corrected by the legislature. So no argument
can be heard from these people. But what happened when this
particular group home application came, it was changed from
Harbinger House. You are seeing a different creature. I think
that we have to hold that in this application up to that statute.
What really prompted my advent into this case is the nature of
the conditional use application. It talks about not having the
staff that Harbinger House had. Harbinger House had staff in-
house 24 hours a day. That to my way of thinking was not
anything imaginative by the Western Montana Mental Health Center.
It is the law. And it is still the law, whether you call it a
community residential facility or a group home. It isn't a statute
in the mental health section of the law. It happens to be a
statute under planning and zoning. Mental health groups in our
state saw difficulty, because of the zoning opposition, to comply
with the need to have a residential setting to deinstitutionalize
people to get them where they should be in society, even though
they may have some mental impairment. I personally believe in
the wisdom of that. A community residential facility serving eight
or less persons is considered a residential use of property for the
purposes of zoning. If the home provides care on a 24 hour per
day basis, that is exactly what Harbinger House was. That 24
hour a day care meant exactly what it says, there is somebody
there with the people. That's why you had no opposition to the
Harbinger House. It worked very well. But, if there is not that
`--� 24 hour a day care, what is there going to be. They have
represented that there is going to be some staffing to 9 p.m. and
there will be access for crisis. But you have the authority and
ability to hold this application up to what the legislature says is
now your zoning code. I don't care what you put differently in
your definitions. They are confusing. . Brian Wood, Kalispell
Zoning Administrator has rendered an opinion, a copy of which
has been submitted to Board members. I concur with Mr. Wood on
the question of "what does 24-hour-a-day care mean?" I think
what you hear from the applicant is that can be satisfied by
something less than the staffing at Harbinger House. The
difference is the expense, that is what it really boils down to. I
believe firmly that the trade-off to society in this setting,
considering them residential uses, was to have that staffing. I
have found nothing in the law library defining what 24 hour a
day care is.
What is really interesting to me, when Ms. Kent came forward and
suggested that the title be changed to conform with the licensing
requirement. That is a very interesting matter, because in effect
there is no licensing, contrary again to what the legislature
desired, the department of social services was directed to set up
standards and licensing for community homes, and they haven't
done it. I talked to the people in Helena who will be licensing
this home and found out what the license is. It is is a little
license that you get from the health department called a public
accomodation. It truly is envisioned in the statute to have the
department of social services set true standards for a group
home, or community residential facility. If you talk to the people
at social services, they said with other things they had to do,
5
they would let the health department issue a license. This license
has nothing to do with anything. They don't even care who
resides there. It is just a public accomodation which triggers the
inspection of the cooking facility. That has no enlightenment to
us as to what 24 hour a day care is. The only guidance I can
get from the zoning ordinance is that under the definition of
"group home" you do talk about excluding the supervisors and
staffing people from the number eight you are allowed in there.
The only reason to exclude them is that they would be living
there, not just visiting part of the day, as it is a residential
facility. That gives us some guidance. The only other thing I
can see is that the spirit of your whole zoning ordinance is to
promote the health, safety and general welfare of the community.
The community truly is the residents in the facility. The other
side of that community definition is the community around them.
I did not come here to oppose this group home, for two reasons
(1) I believe they belong in our community; and (2) it would be
the most stupid thing I could do as a lawyer, because group
homes cannot be opposed. You have no choice, the council has no
choice. But you do have a controlling mechanism, and that is two
simple things. (1) No more than eight people; and (2) care on a
24 hour a day basis.
Winnifred Storli, Vice-president of Flathead Alliance for the
Mentally Ill, which consists of family members and consumers who
have severe and persistent mental illness. Years ago I fought
hard to get Harbinger House group home, and we did it according
to all -the laws. We went to the neighbors with a petition. Before
anyone moved there we did exactly what we were supposed to do.
I am a person who is really involved with people with serious
mental illness. I want them to have the very best possible care.
Both my mother and my daughter have schizophrenia, so I am
really involved with people and where they live. We need
hospitals, we need group homes, we need independent living. I
can say that Harbinger House was one of the best things we ever
had. I am not against group homes. I am very much for them.
I am very much for independent living. But, I think that
Independence Horne needs 24 hour care. Especially now with the
last legislature, a bill was passed that sent half of the residents
of Warm Springs to Deer Lodge, and reduced it to 110 beds, which
includes about 50-60 that are in forensic, leaving 50-60 beds for
the rest of the population. Now these are not criminals. These
are people who have a very severe illness. It doesn't take an
Einstein to know 100's more people are coming into the community.
For people who are very sick, for people who have just been put
on medication, for people who haven't been plugged into the
system, if they don't have a home, they need the comradeship,
they need someone to be there at 3 o'clock at night. I think what
Richard and Sylvia meant was that they pray, as I pray, that you
don't kick us out into the streets. I do think there are people
who have a terrible burden, a terrible affliction. I believe that
the mental health center has bills and there are all sorts of
�-� changes, but I do believe that a home is fundamental. If we have
people who don't have a home, a group home is the next best
thing. You also have to remember that some of us never get well
enough to function independently. For these reasons, we need
6
(� more group homes. In Kalispell, we have just about everything
- now -- we have a hospital, a doctor, a day treatment center, and
I can't see any reason why we should close down something that
has worked so well, so I hope that the zoning commission won't
try to get modern and try to be experimental, and that we will
continue to have a 24 hour care group home which is what we
need. I am for group homes, but I don't think this particular one
is going to work. [Mrs. Storli submitted a packet of testimony to
Board members which is part of the record.]
Marge Leming, 1209 2nd Avenue East, which is two doors down
from the proposed home, and she is not against patients. I think
if all of us search our souls and our memories we will find that
we have some where in the family that someone has a problem that
can't be fixed. I think that these people need someone within
reach 24 hours a day, because when you really break up, you may
not be able to call the crisis line or anyone else. You need
someone right there. That is my only objection. I would like to
see that they have 24 hour care, otherwise they are welcome in
the neighborhood.
A member of Lamplighter House, said that he knows from being in
this condition, that these people do need places so that they won't
be on the streets. I have a mental illness and I will never get
over it.
Juanita Dyer, 1245 2nd Avenue East, testified that she is a retired
nurse and she is very concerned about patients being without 24,
hour care. Most of these folks are usually on medication, and
when they get to feeling better, they stop taking it, or mix it
with alcohol. Several of the residents just seem to wander around
at all hours, so they don't really all go to wherever they are
supposed to go at early hours of the morning. Wandering around
is fine, but I don't think you should be informed that they are
going somewhere and they are not. They need some kind of
structure. They need somebody that they can talk to. As a
nurse, I know that if anything is going to happen it is going to
happen at 2 o'clock in the morning. You may not even be aware
that you can call somebody on the phone. It is not right. I have
no objection whatsoever to the house being there. I don't like
labels. I think it is unfair -to call them anything except
neighbors. And I would like to do that. They are entitled to the
best care they can possibly get on a 24 hour basis. They need
that much assistance. We all need assistance from each other.
Nancy Dunham, 228 2nd Avenue East, said there was a time when
she was in the hospital in Missoula before I knew anything about
the existence of a group home or anything. When I got out of the
hospital, I camped out by the river and lived on the streets. The
second time around I ended up going to the Harbinger House,
which was an alternative to the streets. I truly believe if it
hadn't been for the Harbinger House, I would be homeless once
again. I really feel that it is important to have somebody there,
because there have been times in the middle of the night, if you
are in a bad way and you get on the phone, and there isn't
somebody there -to talk to, god only knows what you'll end up
(� doing. There are a lot of people, if it weren't for group homes,
their alternative would be the streets.
Yvonne Letta, said 'her son is manic depressive, and he has
refused to take medication. He has caused problems for himself
and he is now in Warm Springs. He is responding rapidly and
they have got him taking his medication, and he is willing to learn
about the disease now. But it took 24 hour care for them to gain
his trust for him to do this. So, I really feel this is needed. He
is 24 years old and he needs constant care.
There being no further testimony, the public hearing was closed
and the meeting opened to Board discussion.
Discussion Lopp said that this has been a very emotional hearing for him,
because it is entirely different than what I expected. I have
heard so often "we support, but not in my backyard". I came in
this evening convinced knowing the need for this type of facility
and I really commend you for your attitude and support to these
people who so desparately need care.
Hash asked that the statutes be read for clarification as to what
is being discussed. Parsons read the statutes referred to in the
public testimony, which are attached as a part of the minutes.
(MCA 76-2-411 and 76-2-412). The question that arises is "what
does 24 hour a day mean?" Parsons cautioned the Board that it
is State law, and the Board probably shouldn't get into defining
what the State intended.
Brian Wood asked to address his letter of April 10, 1995 to Mr.
Astle. He wanted to point out a few things, so that the Board will
understand his response to Mr. Astles' questions in letter dated
April 4, 1995. The most important thing to understand is Bill's
question. Bill asked me to respond to Section 27.37.010(105) of the
Kalispell Zoning Ordinance. In our definition of "group home", it
refers to MCA 76-2-412, and the definition of "community
residential facility",is defined in MCA 76-2-411, which does not
speak to 24 hour a day care. It simply defines uses that are
community residential facilities.
The Board asked if these issues had been litigated to establish
a clear definition? Wood answered that Glen Neier has not
informed him of any case law.
Bill Astle said that he was perplexed, as all of these definitions
come under Part 4 - Application to Governmental Acencies Group
and Foster Homes, and you find everything defined for zoning
purposes. A "community residential facility" means a community
group home for developmentally, mentally or severely disabled
persons which does not provide skilled or intermediate nursing
care. Skilled nursing care was not provided at Harbinger House,
and Harbinger House was a community group home. Then in the
following section it is defined that it is a residential use, provided
that it provides care - not skilled nursing care - on a 24 hour a
day basis. So I think it is mumbo-jumbo. The definition for a
community residential facility is a community group home that is
8
not providing nursing care, but providing care on a 24 hour a
day basis, and that is historically meant in this state as staffing.
Somebody who is there with them, somebody lives there as part
of their family. To try to change that, as you hear Ms. Kent try
to say it is her purpose to relate that to the license. That is
bunk!
Kennedy expressed confusion with Western Montana Mental Health
Center's late change to their application. It has the appearance
of trying to get around the 24 hour care. Based on testimony,
many of the same people who resided at Harbinger House with 24
hour care, are to be living at this facility, without 24 hour care.
If this an intermediate facility where people learn independent
living skills, how can you have the same clients as in Harbinger
House be in this home? Was Harbinger House not set up to teach
independent living skills? And are the clients that currently live
in the home on 2nd Ave East, are they all going to be released
and into independent living in 3-6 months?
Ted Newsom, outreach case manager, asked to address these
questions. The Chair recognized him to speak. He said that I am
personally responsible for staffing Independence House. One of
the things we did was to provide, varying on the side of caution,
24 hour care to begin with and then have the flexibility - unlike
at T-House - of putting in more than one staff member if needed
~' when that staff member, thought there may be a crisis. They
have the flexibility through the case management program to pull
in up to five staff members to work on a 24 hour basis, if needed,
and will make that call given the situation. We did that for the
first couple of weeks, and it was almost overkill. Everybody was
in bed, doing well, and we didn't need the 24 coverage. What is
unique about this housing situation is that it provides affordable
housing. There are far more stringent rules on the use of
alcohol, and the screening process of people applying for this
situation, than for 8 college students moving in, disturbing the
neighbors, throwing beer bottles out the window, etc. We couldn't
call in extra staff members to cover that.
If we need the extra staff people, the two professionals who are
working there, the case managers, will call in the relief case
manager or the primary case manager. Everybody that lives in
that house presently has at least two case managers - one works
with them during the day, one works with them during the
evening up to 11:00 p.m. Between the -two of them the Mental
Health professional system, which is our emergency system, we can
call in a number of relief people who can spend the night there.
They can spend one-to-one time with that resident if it is serious
enough. If one person is needed to stay with all eight people, we
can do that also. There are presently 53 people living
independently, probably unbeknownst to you, that has a case
manager that comes in to provide service during the day, possibly
( at 8:00 p.m., at 10:00 p.m. or 9:00 a.m. These folks that live in
the Independence House will probably transition and move out into
an independent apartment. Somebody else will come in and the
neighbors probably will not even know the difference. What is
really unique with this place, that actually makes it better than
9
(' 1 24 hour care T-House, Harbinger House model, is that it provides
more affordable housing and better flexibility as far as staffing
goes. We can accomodate our staffing patterns to the needs of
the residents. Two of the residents that were in the Harbinger
House are in this house. There are three people who weren't in
Harbinger House that are in Independence House. The time frame
of 3-6 months is a ballpark figure. There are folks that have
lived in the Harbinger House longer than that. On an individual
basis, it may take someone 12 months to learn to cook for one
instead of cooking for eight. I wouldn't lock into that 3-6 month
timeframe. There is a group of people in there who probably
could move on in 3-6 months. The biggest problem is that
probably the reason most of the people in Harbinger House moved
into Independence House is .because of a lack of affordable
housing.
Kennedy asked . if Independence House is the replacement for
Harbinger House, or is there another 24 hour care home proposed
in the future?
Newsom responded that he was not aware of another group home
with 24 hour care. But when you think about the 24 hour care,
probably all 8 residents in Harbinger House could tie sheets
together and climb out of their upstairs windows and no one
would know about it anyway. We are relying on the staff there
to make the call on whether they will need the extra people in
-� and will have the flexibility to have 24 hour care. That is there.
And it doesn't mean that it needs to be the responsibility of the
resident living there to make a call that they are having
problems, are having a crisis, and need someone to come in right
away. We can make that call with a staff person saying we need
someone here for 24 hours. The other thing is that some of these
folks are in what we call constructive activity for 6 hours during
the day. They will attend Lamplighter House, or go to school or
work. It would seem to me that in a transitional house, which
this is, that we want to move people out into the community to
add to the 53 out there who work with case managers. They are
working a 6 hour a day job, coming back to their house, in this
case, Independence House. Medication compliance is a concern I
heard, and that is one of the things that is addressed. There are
very stringent rules about medication compliance, about alcohol,
about tobacco use/smoking. It is probably safer than my house.
Bob Lopp felt that the answers that Mr. Newsom gave begs two
questions: (1) Either the 24 hour care that was provided at
Harbinger House was not really that necessary, because the same
clientele are in both facilities, or (2) there is a financial reason
why you do not wish to provide 24 hour care at the new facility.
The second issue for me is, I understand the qualifications of
your staff, but when 11:00 p.m. comes, that does not necessarily
�- mean that all the potential risks of the night have been identified.
And that is what the neighborhood is asking for. That there be
somebody onsite, who recognizing that at 2:00 a.m. we do have a
crisis, it is not contingent upon the person with the crisis to
make those phone calls, or the other residents of the house who
may not be that qualified to make those calls. I think that is
10
jsomething the neighbors have a legitimate reason to ask for the
24 hour care. On my own thought process this evening, I simply
cannot see a separation between 411 and 412 in the statute. It
states 24 hour care, but does not define that. Until I find a
compelling reason to separate the two, I can't at this point and
would favor keeping the conditions as listed. He asked staff who
would give the legal definition of 24 hour care.
Parsons responded that condition #2 is intended to reinforce the
State law. What I was referring to is that 24 hour care needs to
be provided, and let the State decide what that means. He
pointed out that the applicant has formally requested a
continuance.
Kennedy argued that since one month would not bring forth any
change in the staff report, she felt that the request to continue
be denied.
Patricia Kent was allowed to address their request for
continuance. The request for continuance is based on the
distinctions the Kalispell Zoning Ordinance makes in the application
procedure. Under the conditional use permit there are a number
of different types of facilities that are permitted uses by way of
conditional use permit. We wish to make it clear that we are
applying under the community residential facility. It is only to
^� ensure that the notice is appropriate, and that our application is
reflected for that use.
Hash said that she sees it as a distinction without meaning since
they both refer back to companion state statutes.
Kent said that it may very well be a distinction without a
difference, but I think that if you look very carefully at 412 it
talks about if you wish to be considered a residential use for
zoning purposes these are two things you need to do. Our point
is that we don't need to be considered a residential use or any
other use, because we are a permitted use by way of conditional
use permit. 412 simply says that if you wish to a residential use
this is what you need to do, where 411 is a definition for a
community residential facility that your zoning ordinance relies
upon. This is not something we came up with to avoid a 24 hour
care provision. When we closed Harbinger House many months
ago, there was never any intent to continue a staff person that
slept overnight. I want to make it clear that Harbinger House's
24 hour care, was not a certified mental health professional awake
24 hours a day. They were skilled people, but they went to sleep
at night, just like anyone else. What we have tried to explain is
that the level of care will be much higher, and there is the ability
to bring in additional staff the way this is structured. I am
asking to base this legally, as mental health professionals provide
a much higher degree of care to those in need. The fact that
group home is written on the application, was not our intent to
originally have someone sleep overnight and now we are changing
it. It was an error because within the profession those terms are
used synomously, as they are in section 411. So, it is a clerical
error, if you will, based on the distinction -that is made in your
11
( zoning ordinance, but not within the state statute. The people
who have testified have been involved with this process for a
very long time. Particularly Mrs. Storli, well knows that this is
not a last minute change. We have proposed this staffing pattern
for many months. My position is that 24 hour care is something
that is not defined, and notwithstanding the fact that Mr. Astle
says it is clear, it is the law, the law, the law. If you look at the
cases that address this, not one talks about 24 hour care. In
fact, the Family Services case talks about the legislative intent
and goes on for great length that the fact that the protection to
the community and the residential neighborhood was limiting the
size, and it mentions nothing about 24 hour care. None of the
three cases that address this issue even speak to 24 hour care.
So, -the question is what does the State mean? Nobody really
knows. What we are trying to say is that we are the mental
health professionals that deal with the clients on a day to day
basis, and we would like to have the opportunity to assess their
needs as we have been trained to do. If the State wants to
redefine 24 hour care, then perhaps the State should do that.
It was noted for the record that a letter was received from Susan
Munter Moss representing her mother who lives at 1235 2nd
Avenue East, requesting 24 hour care. Mrs. Storli submitted a
packet of paperwork prior to her spoken testimony which will also
be included in the record. It consists of issues pertaining to
�1 Harbinger House, minutes from Western Montana Mental Health
/ Center's Board of Directors meetings, and assorted newspaper
articles.
Walt Bahr stated that he had no doubt that this facility does
require 24 hour care. What that level of care is, I am certainly
not in a position to interpret. I feel the conditions are adequate.
Motion Bahr moved to adopt report #KCU-95-01 as findings of fact, and
send a favorable recommendation to City Council to grant the
conditional use permit with the five (5) conditions set forth.
Sanders seconded.
Amended Motion Kennedy amended the motion to direct the applicant to amend
their application with the requested clarification to change this to
a community residential facility as intended. Western Mental
Health Center shall revise the application to clearly indicate their
intent for it to be a community residential facility not a group
home, and that corrected application be submitted within 2 days
to be sent -to City Council. Lopp seconded. On a roll call vote
Hodgeboom, Kennedy, Sanders, Carlson, Lopp, Bahr voted aye.
Hash voted no. The motion on the amendment carried on a 6-1
vote.
A roll call vote on the motion to grant conditional use permit
#KCU-95-02 carried on a 6-1 vote. Sanders, Hodgeboom, Bahr,
Carlson, Lopp and Kennedy voted aye. Hash voted no.
\_J
HINZMAN ZONE Hash introduced a request by Randy Hinzman for a change in zone
CHANGE / from RA-2 (High Density Residential Apartment) -to B-4 (Central
RA-2 TO B-4 Business) on property described as the east 82 feet of Lots 7 and
12
8, Block •48, Original Townsite Kalispell, in the NE4 of Section 18,
Township 28 North, Range 21 West, P.M.M., Flathead County,
Montana. The address is 239 2nd Street West. The property is
located on the north side of 2nd Street West approximately 70 feet
east of 3rd Avenue West.
Staff Report John Parsons gave an overview of report #KZC-95-02. Based on
the evaluation of the statutory criteria, staff recommended
approval of the requested zone change, as it meets all the
necessary criteria.
The Board asked about the surrounding uses and whether this
was a substandard lot? Parsons said that the property across the
alley is zoned B-4, and that the lot is platted deed of record.
Public Hearing The public hearing was opened to those in favor of the proposal.
In Favor Randy Hinzman, the applicant, explained that the property is
currently zoned RA-2 and there is B-4 zoning to the south. It
-would accomodate the current plan that the City has in place at
this time, to have a B-4 zone. There is a day care business that
operates to the west on 3rd Avenue West and 2nd Street. If you
did not know the business existed there, you would think it was
just a residential property. Business is conducted outside the
State of Montana, it is not a local business, there would be no
j 1 signs. The only changes would be cosmetic, and a change to the
U entrance of the building to comply with the Americans with
Disabilities Act.
There being no further speakers either in favor or in opposition
to the requested zone change, the public hearing was closed and
opened to Board discussion.
Discussion Kennedy had concerns with parking needs for the business.
City staff responded that this area is included in the downtown
parking district, so parking exemptions would apply.
Lopp stated that the B-4 zone designation is in no sense a buffer.
It is simply an extension of the central business zone.
Hash asked the applicant the reason for his request for a zone
change.
Mr. Hinzman replied that he could currently operate his business
in the RA-2 zone if he lived in the home. However, he chooses
not to.
Motion Bahr moved to adopt report #KZC-95-02 as findings of fact and
forward a favorable recommendation to City Council to rezone the
property from RA-2 to B-4. Carlson seconded. On a roll call vote
Carlson, Kennedy, Hodgeboom, Sanders, Bahr, Lopp and Hash voted
aye. The motion carried unanimously in favor of granting the
zone change.
13
McKEE The next item was a request by Timothy McKee for annexation and
ANNEXATION & an initial zone of R-3 (Urban Single Family Residential) upon
ZONE CHANGE annexation into the City of Kalispell. The properties are located
R-5 TO R-3 on the south side of Oregon Street approximately 400 feet east of
8th Avenue EN. The address is 1048 East Oregon, and is further
described as Assessor's Tracts 30X and 33 in the SE4NW4 of
Section 8, T28N, R21W, P.M.M., Flathead County, Montana.
Staff Report Parsons presented a review of report #KA-95-3, which evaluated
the request to zone the property R-3 upon annexation into the
City. Based on the statutory criteria for zone changes, staff
recommended approval.
Public Hearing The public hearing was opened to proponents of the requested
zone change upon annexation.
In Favor Timothy McKee, the applicant, said that it was his property and
he was in favor of the R-3 zoning.
No one else spoke either in favor or in opposition to the
requested zone change. The public hearing was closed and the
meeting opened to Board discussion.
Motion Carlson moved to adopt report #KA-95-3 as findings of fact and
forward a favorable recommendation to the City Council to grant
O the requested zone change upon annexation. Kennedy seconded.
On a roll call vote Bahr, Lopp, Carlson, Hodgeboom, Kennedy,
Sanders and Hash voted aye.
OLD BUSINESS There wasn't any old business.
NEW BUSINESS Parsons announced that there were eight items on the May
meeting agenda. The Board agreed by concensus to start the
meeting at 6:00 p.m. Milt Carlson and Walter Bahr will not be
present for the May meeting.
ADJOURNMENT There being no further business, the meeting was adjourned at
9:25 p.m.
i
ate. A d,, U Ey�,,
Therese Fox Hash, President Eli b th Ontko, Recording Secretary
i
APPROVED:�f-
14