Loading...
10-13-88 Planning BoardKALISPELL CITY -COUNTY PLANNING BOARD AND ZONING COMMISSION MINUTES OF MEETING OCTOBER 13, 1988 CALL TO ORDER The meeting was opened by Charles Manning, President, at 7:07 p. m. AND ROLL CALL Those present were Stephens, Robbins, Sloan, Hash, and Manning. Reynolds arrived at 8:00 p.m. Those absent were Furlong, Frazer, and Hall. David Greer, Senior Planner, represented the Flathead Regional Development Office. There were approximately 22 people in the audience. APPROVAL OF MIN- Stephens moved to approve the minutes of the meeting held on UTES SEPTEMBER 13 September 13, 1988. Robbins seconded the motion and passed 1988 unanimously. PROPOSED EVER- Manning introduced the consideration of the creation and rescission GREEN ZONING of county zoning districts within an area described as having a DISTRICT perimeter description as follows: Southerly boundary is U.S. Highway 2/Montana Highway 35 extending from the easterly city limits of Kalispell to the Flathead River; Northerly boundary is Rose Crossing extending from U.S. Highway 93 to the Flathead River. Westerly boundary is the Kalispell city limits extending north of U.S. Highway 2 along U.S. Highway 93 to the area of Rose Crossing; Easterly boundary is the Flathead River extending northerly from Montana Highway 35 to the area of Rose Crossing. Greer gave the staff presentation saying that the basis for the consideration is that it is a continued effort by Flathead County to establish zoning districts around the city limits of Kalispell. Up to this point the Willow Glen Zoning District and the West Side Zoning District have been established. Greer addressed a map on the wall showing the area under consideration. He stated that within this area there are eight existing zoning districts and part of this proposal is to rescind these zoning districts concurrently with the establishment of the Evergreen Zoning District. The staff has tried to examine the existing character of the area which has highway commercial along Highway 2 and Highway 35, industrial uses, residential neighborhoods, and intermixed throughout the whole area are mobile home parks. A large segment of the area has large residential tracts. Above Reserve Drive there are established agricultural lands. The existing traffic patterns and road networks were also taken into consideration. Environmental limitations such as floodplain areas and areas without sewer systems, etc. were also considered when proposing zoning classifications for given properties. The State has 12 statutory criteria that are to be reviewed with establishing zoning districts. These criteria were highlighted by Greer. Greer addressed a map of the Kalispell City - County Master Plan saying that it depicted the way the Evergreen area is envisioned to develop over the next 20 years. The proposed zoning districts are in substantial compliance with the Master Plan. State Law requires that any zoning be in compliance with the Master Plan. 1 Greer explained that the staff tried to keep the more intensive land uses closer to the main arterials and highways and encourage higher �) density development where services exist. The staff did not try to zone intensively where the area might be prone to flooding and services such a fire and police are limited. Existing development patterns were recognized. There are some areas where it is still primarily residential but neighborhood businesses and a lot of home occupations are creeping in. The staff could not propose general commercial in those areas. Zoning in those cases represents the general character of the neighborhood. There have been three informational meetings and as a result of those meetings a lot of the zoning district lines have been changed. Greer noted that there are several areas where the staff has not necessarily agreed with a request and it will be up to the Planning Board to decide what should be proposed there. It appears that the mail has been generally favorable to the zoning. Some letters have requested zoning preferences and the staff has tried to accommodate their wishes. Northwest Mechanical on Highway 35 East near Spruce Park wishes to be zoned Light Industrial. It does need a industrial zoning classification to be considered a permitted use otherwise it is a grandfathered use. The surrounding area is primarily residential. The staff has given that area a R-5 zoning classification because the staff has some concern about the floodplain in that area. It has been asked as to why the whole strip area is not zoned general commercial. The whole strip is zoned general commercial except for an area around Valley Chiropractic (� Clinic. Most of the property in the vicinity is residential but it �l could be zoned general commercial should the Board wish to. Bolster's Towing on Helena Flats Road is located in a primarily residential area. It would take a light industrial classification to continue the operation as a permitted use. Otherwise, the use is grandfathered at its present level. Mr. Marshburn has a lot in Evergreen Estates, a mobile home subdivision, who operates a number of businesses in his home which are all fairly different ranging from office use to light industrial. No matter what classification given to him some part of the businesses he conducts would still be non- conforming. The staff has proposed R-5 because of the existence of the mobile home subdivision and at the very least he would be grandfathered with that classification. Ray Lybeck owns property along Helena Flats Road which is being proposed as suburban agriculture. He would prefer R-1 zoning for future development. There is a diesel shop and Missoula Truck Sales in an area just east of the Highway 2/Highway 35 intersection. The proposed zoning is B-3 but he really needs light industrial to have the diesel shop. One individual that lives in Solberg Acres has a business operating on his property. The majority of the area is residential in character and there is no classification that would allow for a mixture of uses. The area is more residential than commercial. Residential R-2 is being proposed but he would need a B-3 classification for his established business. The area of Spruce Park is zoned R-5 to recognize the mobile home park. The owner feels that the highway frontage should be zoned -, general commercial. 2 Public Hearing Manning called for proponents of the Evergreen Zoning District proposal. Mike Dailey, 245 Addison Square, asked what constitutes a home occupation in a residence area or how big does the business get before it is no longer home occupation. Since he is on the school board for Helena Flats School, he is concerned with taxable valuation per student. For example, a ten acre parcel with two or three kids is worth a dollar figure per student. If you take the same ten acres and put eight trailers on it, the taxable valuation per student has gone up but the school load has increased from three to thirty students. Helena Flats is one of the poorest districts in terms of taxable valuation per student. The development should be done that enhances the taxable value per student. He expressed favorability to the SAG-1 zoning classification for the area he lives. He also asked how you classify business and what is considered industrial? Manning asked Greer to answer the questions regarding home occupations. Greer stated that the way the ordinance currently reads is that you can have a home occupation that occupies up to 25% of your dwelling and you cannot hire outside employees. There is not a great deal of flexibility. If advertising is being done and you are genuinely conducting business on your residential property and attracting traffic to your home for business purposes, at some point it is no longer a home occupation but a full fledged business. It is hard to draw the lines and each one is handled on a case by case basis. As a staff, we are proposing to redefine or re-examine the definition of home occupations so that in the future there will be more flexibility allowed for home occupations. Mr. Dailey pointed out that some of these properties have a lot of separate buildings that are not the home or the garage. Greer stated that it is tough to generalize these things and that is why they are reviewed on a case by case basis. Colleen Scharfe, 383 Addison Square, stated that she is in favor of the Suburban Agricultural designation placed on their property. There have been too many negative influences such as trailer parks and junk yards invading their area. George Schulze, 357 West Evergreen Drive, asked if the corner was zoned B-3. He had zoned it B-3 several years ago. Greer asked if it had been zoned B-3 or B-1. George Schulze said that it had been zoned B-3. Greer stated that if it was B-3 then they would change it back. Schulze asked if there was a zone on the College property? Greer stated that it is in the city limits. He expressed no opposition to the zoning other than the questions he just expressed. Lorraine Callan, 397 Addison Square, is in favor of the zoning designation of suburban agriculture on their property. Joe Keller, 183 Fairmont Road, representing Missoula Truck Sales and the diesel shop, stated that he would like to see this as light to heavy industrial. There are a lot of uses that are industrial. Currently we are not causing major traffic congestion and would like 3 to be allowed to continue as a permitted use. We have business plans that call for expansion and we will not be able to pursue those plans without the industrial zoning. The building was permitted and meets all the codes and should be used for what it was intended. Bob Henneman, 156 East Cottonwood Drive, expressed favorability for the zoning as shown. Ray Van Lancken, 1939 Highway 35 East, does business as Northwest Mechanical. He stated that light industrial zoning is requested for this property. He wondered if now was the time to make those remarks. Manning explained that if a landowner is unsatisfied with the zoning placed on their property, they should voice that opinion now. At a future meeting the Board will study the requests and the proposal and possibly make changes and send a recommendation to the County Commissioners. Mr. Van Lancken also felt that all of Highway 35 should be zoned commercial instead of breaking it up into little residential lots. Most people have invested in this highway frontage for commercial reasons and not as residential purposes. John Cannan felt that if this had been done 15 to 20 years ago many of the people would have been a lot happier. Manning called for more proponents. There being none. He called for opponents to speak. Terry Williams, 217 East Evergreen Drive, stated that he owns Terry's small engine and Air Compressor in the Solberg Acres. He did not feel that the residential zoning would be beneficial to his established business. He has had the business for the past five years. He added that he is loaned to the hilt on that business and if it should burn down or meet with some other tragedy, the grandfather clause would not allow him to rebuild. He felt that was unfair to him and his lending institution since five years ago everything was done with approval and in good faith. This would then constitute a taking of my business. Greer explained that the way the current zoning regulations are written is that if the grandfathered business burns more than 50%. Williams felt that it is wrong to deny the rebuilding of a business if it burns down. He added that he had no problem with planning and zoning. He felt that zoning was good so that everyone knows where they stand. Five years ago Williams knew where he stood and now he doesn't. Manning asked for clarification from Greer on the rebuilding of a business in a grandfathered situation. Greer stated that a zone change would be the best choice before the Planning Board. Williams asked if that was a gamble. If it is, he doesn't gamble with his property. Darrell Clothier, owner of Spruce Park, asked if David Greer was paid for doing this zoning planning? Manning stated that the Flathead Regional Development Office is hired by the Countywide Administrative Board to oversee the planning of Flathead County and they act as technical staff for the planning boards in each of the three cities and the county jurisdictions. Clothier asked if it was impossible to contact everyone in Evergreen that they are being zoned? Manning said 4 that it may have been possible although the statutory requirements do not require that. Clothier asked, "What right do you have to divide my property in half and zone half one way and the other half another way?" Manning stated that sometimes when dealing with frontage property sometimes the characteristics would deem the highway frontage being one zone while the rear property be another zone especially if it is a large tract. He stated that he has a business on the property and the way it is proposed to be zoned the business is being limited strictly to the west half of the property. He added that he has plans to put in a small commercial store in the future and the zoning would not allow it. Manning stated that the zoning boundaries does not have to go on a property line. Clothier asked where, how and why does the zoning Board have the right to say you can have half of your business in and the other half out? Clothier asked why the City of Kalispell is dictating to the Evergreen area what they have to do? Manning stated that the Board is made up of four members from the County, four members from the city, and one member elected from the other eight members. The Board acts on the. behalf of either the city or the county. In this case the County has requested the zoning review and the Board is acting as an agent for the County not the city. Manning further explained that this formula is set up according the state laws. Clothier further wished for the Board to answer what right the Board had to cut the property in half with two different zones? Clothier further added that he is opposed to being zoned when it is a very unfair zoning. Manning assured him that the Board would take his request into consideration before making a recommendation to the County Commissioners. Clothier again asked why everyone in Evergreen was not notified? Manning explained that the Board has been following the procedures as outlined by state law. Each area that has been considered has been reviewed in the same fashion. Clothier asked if 40% of the resident freeholders opposed the zoning of Evergreen could it be thrown out? Manning stated that it could. Clothier asked how long one would have to do this? Manning stated that whenever the County Commissioners sign a Resolution of Intent there will be a 30-day protest period. A member of the audience asked when the Commissioners would act on this? Manning said it could be soon or they could sit on it for a year. He added that this Board will send the recommendation on to the Commissioners in the near future and the Commissioners will act in their own time. Jerry O'Neil► 202 Helena Flats Road, stated that he is philosophically opposed to zoning. He added that he has a professional office and is in the process of putting a light manufacturing business on his property. He felt that it was wrong to tell people what they can do with their property. He used Lum Owens as an example. He added that Hillcrest Estates has covenants and that is fine because they did with the property as they chose. Maybe people in addison Square should put covenants on their property if they want to but I do not want to be zoned and it is not my choice and I do not want to be told what to do with my property. Ray Lybeck, 500 East Reserve Drive, stated that he is opposed to the zoning designation on his property. He stated that he has been hoping to develop the property for his retirement and the SAG-1 zoning would 5 preclude that. He would prefer R-1 classification. He felt that getting zone changes would be a lengthy costly project. A member of the audience asked for more explanation of the grandfather clause. Manning directed Greer to do so. Greer went into a more detailed description of the grandfather clause. Linc Engel, 21 Sunset Drive, stated that it seemed to him that somewhere in the law there is a statement that if you have something and it is arbitrarily taken from you, you must be compensated. Manning closed the public hearing when there was no one else wishing to speak. Manning entered into the record letters received from Swinehart, Marshburn, Woldenberg, Scarfe, Canada, Callan, Christensen, Dailey, Hanson, and Schulze. Board Discussion Manning stated that there has been a lot of good input and concerns expressed by property owners. Therefore, he did not feel that it was appropriate for the Board to make a recommendation at this time until the Board has reviewed the proposal and the requests of property owners. Manning asked that the Board meet again in about two weeks to have a work session so that a recommendation can be made. Stephens and Sloan agreed with the suggestion. Greer suggested that he would call everyone and try to get it organized next week. Bob Henneman, 156 Cottonwood, asked if he might make comment on a piece of property. He stated that he abuts the property where Missoula Truck Sales operates. The owners have requested industrial zoning. He stated that he is opposed to industrial zoning for that property as it is a residential and business area and he would like to see it remain that way. OLD BUSINESS None. NEW BUSINESS None. ADJOURNMENT Stephens moved to adjourn the meeting and Hash seconded the motion. 'f\t passed unanimously and the meeting was adjourned at 8:20 p.m. r . Z�� � Ava Walters, Recording Secretary