Loading...
03-13-84 Planning BoardKALISPELL CITY -COUNTY PLANNING BOARD MINUTES March 13, 1984 Members Present Kathleen Jukich David Reynolds Les Ormiston Jack Peters Chuck Manning Virginia Sloan James Stephens Members Absent Ed Trippet Bob LeDuc Other Members James Mohn, Senior Planner, F.R.D.O. Tom Jentz, Senior Planner, F.R.D.O. Nick Verma, Planning Director, F.R.D.O. Alan Peterson, City Building Official Glen Neier, City Attorney 40 Members of the Public Call to Order The meeting was called to order by Kathleen Jukich and Roll Call at 7:30 P.M. in the Council Chambers, Kalispell City Hall. Roll call was taken. Approval of Minutes Jukich called on any corrections or amendments to the minutes of February 14, 1984. Being none, Sloan moved to approve the minutes. Manning seconded. Motion carried. Larson's Acres Jukich introduced Mohn from the F.R.D.O. Request for Amendment Mohn introduced Tom Jentz to present the F.R.D.O. report. Jentz said that 20 property owners representing 56% of the property in Larson's Acres submitted a petition to amend the Comprehensive Plan from Subur- ban Residential to Industrial. The petition was organized by Mr. and Mrs. Jerry Engle of 21 Sunset Drive who want to construct a mini storage facility on their property and need an industrial classi- fication to do so. The property is located on Sunset Drive between High- way 2 (LaSalle) to the east and railroad tracks to the West. Jentz said the property is surrounded on three sides by suburban residential; about 75% residential with scattered commercial areas. The F.R.D.O. recommendations are as follows: Deny the request to amend the Comprehensive Plan designation from Suburban Residential to Industrial for the following reasons: 1. The site is predominately residential in nature. 2. The site is not conducive to cost effective in- dustrial development due to clearance/demolition costs. 3. Approval of the amendment would create a strip industrial pattern which would potentially neg- atively impact the surrounding residential neighborhoods. 4. Traffic problems, particularly at the Highway 2 intersection and the western deadend of Sunset Drive and the railroad tracks, will be aggra- vated by additional industrial traffic. j5. Industrial designation would accelerate neigh- borhood blight and create an extremely undesir- able area for homeowners as industrial uses move in and maintenance and repair of yards and houses becomes uneconomical and are deferred. 6. Substantial need for additional industrial land at this time has not been documented. Jentz said 4 letters had come in asking Larson's Acres to remain Suburban Residential. He received 8 phone calls, 7 were against the change, one was looking for information. The petition had 20 prop- erty owners represented - 2 petitioners later asked to have their names removed from the petition, leav- ing 18 property owners representing about half the property in favor of the change to Industrial. Jentz wanted to bring out that when building permits are issued right now, residential uses, like garages are permitted. If property did go industrial, the houses there would be allowed to remodel or add on a room - that would be approved. Anyone wanting to build a new home or move a mobile home on the site would not be allowed in an industrial -area. i �.� Jukich asked for input for the proposal. -2- The Board discussed use of building permits. Alan Peterson said a non -conforming use could be re- placed. Peggy Engel said she initiated the zone change. She said the letter sent out from the F.R.D.O. on March 5, 1984 to the property owners of Larson's Acres confused those owners. The third paragraph sounded as though owners could not add a garage or do what they wanted if property was amended to in- dustrial. She didn't want the property owners who signed the petition to think she was deceiving them. She said her main purpose is to build a mini storage unit which is classified as light industrial. She felt most people interested in having a change are more interested in commercial use, and she understood industrial would entail commercial. When she went around to have the petition signed, it was her under- standing owners could still improve on their prop- erty, but that it also entailed commercial. Engel disagreed with the F.R.D.O. report indicating Judith, Margrethe, and Sharon roads serving as rear accesses to several lots, thus spreading industrial impacts and activities into other neighborhoods. In regard to the F.R.D.O. report regarding no public Ji sewer serving the site, she said the County Sanitar- ian would not approve something that didn't conform. She said she and her husband were not interested in creating a large industrial area, only a mini storage unit. She felt a mini storage unit would not really cause additional traffic. Joe Askelson spoke in favor of LaSalle being commer- cial, but said he would be opposed to an industrial classification. Marty Watkins, Sunset Drive, had no objections to industrial as long as it didn't restrict use of her property. Winnifred Robocker objected to proposed amended change to industrial as it would diminish the desir- ability of her rental property which is a major source of income and it would restrict her free use of her adjoining lots for residential. There were further questions regarding commercial / 1 -vs- industrial uses. Jentz explained them. -3- Jerry Engel questioned procedure of variances. Mohn said there was no variance procedure in dealing with the Comprehensive Plan. Mohn said within the area of the City's building permit jurisdiction, if a property is not zoned, and someone wants to put a busine s into an existing structure, there's no one to say you cannot. The question here is the question of new construction for a use that does not comply with the Comprehensive Plan. Engel questioned expanding his garage to possibly a four stall garage for his hobby of fixing cars and reselling them. Mohn explained there are certain building codes that define Use Conditions. If a garage gets too big, the building inspector is going to find that its more than just an accessory use. Peterson then explained the City's procedure on this action. Jukich read letters sent to the F.R.D.O. from prop— erty owners of Larson's Acres objecting to the change to industrial. Rex Miller indicated he had no trouble with the storage units, but if it prevented owners from doing what they wanted, he wasn't for change to industrial. Nancy Kostman wanted to know why there wasn't a variance policy for situations like this. Verma said there were no variances for land use. The Comprehensive Plan is used as a guideline. The City of Kalispell does not issue building permits if it is not in compliance with the Comprehensive Plan. Verma said the F.R.D.O. tells the building inspector how an area is designated. If an area is designated residential, the building inspector is so informed and building permits are issued accordingly. The Supreme Court made a decision there should be no building permits given if property is not in com— pliance with the Comprehensive Plan. Glen Neier said use variances are not permitted by the Kalispell City Zoning Code. The County Zoning Ordinance does not specifically address use variances although it does provide for variances in general. Furthermore, the State enabling legislation does i not specifically prohibit use variances, therefore, it could be conceivable that under the County Zoning Ordinance use variances could be permitted. Although a specific reading of the County Zoning Ordinance — 4-- would be necessary prior to making that determin- ation. Watkins and Engel suggested a new letter be sent from the F.R.D.O. replacing the letter of March 5th. Verma felt the March 5th letter was clear. Manning requested the letter be read. Mohn then discussed the differences between the City and County Zoning Jurisdictions. Ormiston asked Jerry Engel if he wanted to withdraw his proposal. Engel said no. He was going to look into it further and get legal advice and would like another hearing. He would still like to get a variance. Motion Ormiston moved to table action and authorization of Resolution of recommendation to Board of County Commissioners and Kalispell City Council for 30 to 60 days at which time Mr. Engel will get new informa- tion and will contact the F.R.D.O. Peters seconded. Motion carried. ✓' Kalispell City -County Planning Board recessed at 9:15 P.M. Kalispell City -County Planning Board reconvened at 9:30 P.M. Blue Chip K.B.T., Inc. Mohn presented the F.R.D.O. report describing the Annexation Blue Chip K.B.T., Inc. to be located East of Third Avenue East, immediately north of Ace Building Cen- ter. The purpose of the annexation is to locate an amusement enterprise, "simulated golf," which is permitted use in the B-6 zone. The F.R.D.O. recommendations are as follows: The annexation request is in accordance with the Comprehensive Plan. Approval of "Blue Chip Addition" is recommended subject to the following conditions. 1. That all new utility installations be done in accordance with the Kalispell's "Standards and General Provisions for Design and Construction" \ (City Standards). -5- 3. That the landowners waive the right of protest to S.I.D. for adjacent road and right-of-way improvement and storm drain systems. 4. The Certificate of Survey creating the subject tract be filed prior to final action on the annexation request. Jukich asked if there was anyone for or against the annexation. There was no comment. Motion After a brief discussion by the Board, Ormiston moved to approve the annexation as per the Planning Staff's recommendations. Sloan seconded. Motion carried. Discussion of Manning said the League of Women Voters were having Draft Resolution an informational hearing on April 3, 1984 at 7:30 P.M. on the Resolution Adopting Criteria for Evasion of the Subdivision and Platting Act. Sloan suggested Planning Board members attend. Motion Ormiston moved to table the discussion of the draft resolution until the next regular meeting. Stephens seconded. Motion carried. Old Business None New Business Consideration of Work Program for Fiscal Year 1984- 1985. .(Meeting of All Planning Boards March 28th). Jukich said as a Board they hadn't worked up a work program that far. Verma suggested two main projects: 1. Updating the Comprehensive Plan and, 2. Reducing the number of zoning classifications in the City Ordinance. Sloan suggested talking about budget money for seminars. Motion Stephens moved to adjourn the meeting at 9:40 P.M. Ormiston seconded. Motion carried. Respectfully submitted, Sharon H. Bowman Recording Secretary Approved: \l J Chairman WON