Loading...
03-27-793-27-79 Minutes of 2-27-79 Approved. A regular meeting of the Kalispell City —County Planning Board was held at 7:30 p.m., Tuesday, March 27, 1979 at the Courthouse East Community Room, 723 5th. Avenue East, Kalispell, Montana. Members Present: Fran 011endike Dorothy Garvin John Kain James J. Thompsons W. J. Lupton Dale W. Haarr Ray Lybeck Others Present: (2) APO Staff Repr. Steve Petrini Jim Mohn Approx. 30 — 40 Guests President Lupton called,the public hearing held by the Board open at 7:53 p.m.. President called for corrections to the Minutes of 2-27-79, there being none Fran 011endike moved.that they be approved as mailed; seconded by Dorothy Garvin: motion carried. President Lupton opened the hearing on Willow Glen Estates. It was Willow Glen Estates explained that Willow Glen Estates was the subdivision that tied 25.32A, Willow in with the Zone Change Request heard,by the Zoning Commission earlier Glen & Leisure Subdivin the evening and which the Commission had approved. SW4 of NW4, Sec.,2" T28N, R21W. Tabled. Jim stated that the Staff Report was self explanatory` and that he would not go into any specifics unless requested. (copy attached) He gave a brief legal description. Jim stated that the Staff recommended approval this this proposal with three conditions as outlined-.in.the-report. Jim said that as far as input from, adjacent owners, one had indicated with some delight the fact that the development was being proposed and another indicated that as long as, -the zoning did not accommodate mobile homes, there was no objection. Jim said that was all that he had to present. President Lupton,called on Mr. Russell and/or Mr. Stokes for comments on the proposal. Paul Stokes stated as far as the Staff recommenda— .tions were concerned, this was discussed with Jim and the 10' access controlstripwas already there and Mr. Russell agreed to an additional 15' setback on Willow Glen. The extensions of the road both to the north.and to the.east will be preserved as easements, such, that at a ,future date .they can, be put into roads. The only other thing that needs addressing is the topography and the drainage. That portion of ground is a,portion of: an old slough and proposing to recontour it much in the same manner that it is now naturally and not going to alter ;the natural path of the drainage through the subdivision, the natural .drainage comes from the north down through the circle area with.,the park and splits -and goes to the southern most,corners. _Proposing to keep it the same. As for fill will if he can if.this.is a practical alternative but if he has to buy fill then it won!t,be but willing to.,investigate all sources and realizes that he will,have,to.bring in come select material. The contours on the north..and east,,agree,to recontour those where there is not a drainage or erosion problem,,and.those steeper slopes will be reveg- 1. etated. A small area runs down so doesn't feel this will be a problem No problem with the redesign of the intersection confirmed to the Board. John Kain felt that under Item f.) that the Systems should be desi_.ed to city standards, the words should, should be would. Stokes said Mr. Russell was willing to put the water in to city standards. 60' r/w county paved, no curb and gutters was sited. Mr. Lauman who has 2 (201) easements on the roadway and wanted to know if these would stand as is until future planning. They're on the north and south. Wished to know if they would remain as they are now? Unless relocated or abandoned would remain as they are. Felt that perhaps before the Board went further would need to see a site drainage plan. Nice to say it was going to be contoured, but would like to see how. Would like to see, enlight of the soils information; what it would be, 'it is severe for septic, ability, stability, and don't know how this Board could make a recommendation as R-2 zoning and no question that it could become subdivision ground but need more information and need something from the Sanitarian and everything could change those lot sizes from 1/2 Acre to 3/4 Acre and not enough ground for the septic or replacement area after putting a house on'it. Don't believe there is enough information on soils or site drainage or a firm commitment.' What is the fill, how is it going to be contoured, what is the proposal and the status, `a little bit too thin on what is going to be done. John Kain wished to know where the surface water would be drained O to, which direction? Stokes said it drains toward the County Shop and the drainage plan is available. 'Board felt it should be indicated better. Can't tell which are existing and which are new contours. The Board'would like to see the existing contours as long as these are the new ones. 1.Like to know what is happening to the ones next door: Want to know what happen°s to the water once it does come out of there. It was determined that the County Shops fill part of that swale system down there. °Concern was the potential contamination on the county hospital well. Stokes said that 1. they were going to monitor the ground water, 2. going to try to select material and pin down some drainage field sites on the lots and'3. agreed to send some soil samples into a testing lab rather than relying on the old percolation test data. Actually have these tested to determine what needed to be done in order to satisfy the Sanitarian regulations. Have not 'altered the natural'drainage. John Kain moved that this request be tabled until the Board received some written information on the position of the County Sanitarian. Questioned whether"Mr. Russell and'Mr. Stokes should bring back some topographical data and drainage plan changes, etc. Questioned was the time element? Stokes said it was just a matter of drawing it bigger,'etc. whatever was needed. John Kain then so amended and O included this in his conditional motion. Jim Thompson would like to seethe topography when brought back. Feels that the contour is being pushed back to the property fine making a vertical bank against the adjacent property owners, which didn't look too good \ 2. Meridian Manor Townhouses: E side of Meridian Rd across from Libert Street inter. & N. of Underhill Addn, Tracts 6BO,6BI, 6BH and 6BG, Sec. 7 T28N, R21W. (Moved to rec. disapproval). to him. Stokes said this could be softened. This was seconded by Jim Thompson. President.Lupton stated that it was moved and seconded that this proposal be tabled until additional information be obtained concerning topography, etc. Motion carried unanimously. President Lupton asked for a show of hands from people present for the various proposals and it was decided to have Meridian Manor Townhouses heard 1st, Country Estates, 2nd and Sunrise Addition last. President Lupton then called upon Jim Mohn to give a presentation on the Meridian Manor Townhouses. Jim stated this was a dual purpose proposal and then gave a brief description of the location. yJim stated that the developers had requested two parcels, with each approximately 3/4 of an acre for B-1 commercial. (copy of Staff Report attached). Jim stated that all opposition relate.,,d to the commercial aspect of the proposal and very little if any comment on the residential aspects of the project. Jim then thorough discussed the access. Jim did explain that the R-5 zoning did address the townhouse plan and the B1 was neighborhood business district and stated that the Staff did question the basis for providing such a neighborhood district knowing that a lot of the uses permitted in the B-1 are available within a mile of the site, with Circle K located within a 4 of a mile of the site. Hestated there were also some neigh— borhood professional located just north of the site. Jim stated there were three options, see Summary Remarks III, which he proceeded to read. The meeting was then turned -over to public comment. The developer, Mr. Schaffer, stated that Jim had pretty much covered what was proposed except for some aspects. Said that what he had in mind was basically an adult only community. And as such the things that the Staff has recommended does not fit what they should like to do. The developers felt that this would be for the retired and semiretired families. The need for this was borne out by a: strong interest .in retirement age who don't qualify for subsidized housing and,yet,don't;:need the large homes that theyi have, like to be out of them with a maintenance free concept. One recommendation was the access road be rerouted so that it would be opposite>.� Were ab,ls ,:tor do that- The property lines does not -line up with the edge of Liberty, it:;is about 15' or so offset, so if the road is pinned down so could dedicate that half, so the zoning could be good for that for foot traffic through there. Could be given as a .dedication easement, from the school and through the alley way. The staff report indicates that whatever happens:om this piece that there .be a frontage road. The report may give the impression that that was requested or stated by the State• Highway Dept. and: it was, not: , That was strictly a recommendation-by.the APO Staff without benefit of highway comment. Sp.ent.timeiwith the,.highway :department and they are not concerned about a frontage road -on Meridian. and are concerned about the 3. access and having the intersection done the way it was recommended. Mr. Schaffer said a couple of letters which refer to B-3 zoning, which might be misrepresented so that some who signed have rejected but don't know anything about that. Do question the applicabili( of putting B-3 zoning in a report that is concerned with B-1 zoning' which he felt was a significant amount of difference and don't think a B-3 was applicable. Felt that the Staff didn't feel there was a need for commercial property at this time in that area and that there was commercial within a mile which had most of the B-1 classifications and would like to point out that there was some that were not within a quarter of a mile and wondered where the Staff got the feeling as have had two unsolicited requests for space if it were developed and:further consideration on the busines zoning, and 1.) recommending that it be all R-4, as basically all surrounding areas to that, which creates a high density and increased high density and an increased.demand for neighborhood commercial. The Highway Dept. was surposed at the amount of 'letters about widening Meridian as the State Highway Dept. was already planning on widening Meridian and presume that the Staff is aware of that as an authorization has been done to do.a survey and as of this afternoon and if the shopping center goes in on North Meridian they 'anticipate this being not just a widened but a four lane major arterial road. As the traffic volume increases the value as commer ciaL property increases and its desirability as residential decreases. By trying to limit.residential, it isn't going to work unless you limit the traffic., Felt'that the traffic flow on this road wasn't going to stop no matter whether you zone or don't s zoU It'going to,tip the scale that way anyway. Mr. Schaffer felt that B-1 was the proper zoning for the frontage on Meridian and that the townhouses would act as a buffer. Said he di& a survey starting at the railroad tracks and felt that over 75% of the land use already is commercial. Don't know what the proper zone would be for the fairgrounds but it certainly wasn't residential. You can conduct a lot of things on the fairgrounds except fairs. Feel that what:was being asked for fit what was happening inthe area. Jim Thompson wished to know if he had a drainage plan? Was advised no', but the contour was a constant line starting in the corner and runs:in a southwesterly direction. Collect in the center and bring it out to Meridian. John Kain said there was a spur drainage problem on West Arizona and wondered whether they had given any thought that there maybe some r/;w deemed necessary within that area to get some sort of storm sewer system in there.,. Mr. Schaffer advised no they haven't. Felt that the strip, by putting the road there, would become non -useful would also provide area for drainage out to Meridian: Concern was expressed for the layout'of36' r/w down between all those townhouse units, by limiting the access and not having a O through street you would enhance the security aspect of your proposed development, however was it not true that you would have 4. a considerable amount of family adult units in that area, that you have limited parking, which means you would end up with on street parking and would not a fire and ambulance injured for its availability to get to and from any given limit as opposed to security as suggested. Mr. Schaffer said they had agreed to widen this to 40' and reviewed with fire department. At 36' they would still have access, and at 40' comparable access and requested that it be 401. As far as parking, had an abundance of parking. This Then proceeded to indicate them stating that 24' was adequate for two cars and parking. Have roughly 3 — 4 off—street parking spaces per living unit. Areas for turnaround are in excess of the amount required for the largest truck. Jim Thompson questioned the comment on the turnaround for the fire equipment. Jim said the largest ladder truck takes a 100' radius and the smallest one takes 801, and unless they changed their policy within the last 30 days they will not back up their truck. Mr. Schaffer said they laid it out for. them :and they said no problem they could back it out. Must be the new fire chief -because they would not do that in the past. Mr. Schaffer. said to take a look you wouldn't have to back out of the subdivision. John Kain said between units 8 and 15, a 24' wide street with on — street parking, on one side Mr. Schaffer said. Mr. Kain said what about Unit 15, if this -is for 8? Mr. Schaffer said there was, —extra' --parking in --the added pavement area. Put a lot of paving in deliberately, to be used for parking. John Kain was concerned that there be adequate space, for any emergency vehicle which leaves only 8' in the middle which isn't much when you have parking on both sides. After additional comments on the traffic problems, Jim Thompson said he was not a fan on deadend streets and without an adequate turnaround and always someone to get to the end and the design has to accommodate without deadend. Should be accommodated. Jim Thompson's personal opinion was that the proposal was just not acceptable as presented. Fran 011endike said she concurred with Jim, and she was opposed to the B-1 and felt that the entire neighborhood had been polled, with many public hearings and do not believe in the deadend streets, and there should be an overall traffic pattern without all these people spilling out onto Meridian Road. Should have another access to get out more easily, specially older people. Like the townhouse concept though. John Kain felt consideration should be given to water main and would almost have to give flat no's to cul—de—sac water stubs. President Lupton felt that due to the feelings of the Board entertained a motion at this time. Jim Thompson moved that the Board reject the proposal on the grounds that it is not in full concurrence with the Comprehensive Plan and the inadequate design as far as traffic flow was concerned. Jim Thompson said he recommended disapproval; Dorothy Garvin seconded the motion. Motion carried. President Lupton advised Mr. Schaffer that a letter would go to the City Council advising the Board's recommendation and do intend 5. Country Estates Unit No. 1 W of US Hwy 93N between W. Reserve & Stillwater River, EZ of SEk, Sec. 25, T29N, R22W: UNIT NO. 1 & MASTER PLAN. 48 lots Res: Use in Unit. #1 & 211 in Master Plan. (Denied) to some of the points will be stressed. The residential area is an excellent proposal and perhaps he`could find a way financially for it to be advantageous by increasing the dwelling units per acre and carry forth the residential plan. INSERT HERE THE VERBATIM TRANSCRIPT ON: COUNTRY ESTATES UNIT NO. 1 Pages. 1, through 12 Incl. Mp