10-09-7910-9-79
Minutes:8-28-79
&9-25-79 Aped
PUBLIC HEARING:
Continuation of
Anderson Subdiv.
Appd with Condition]
A regular meeting of the Kalispell City -County Planning
Board, and the Zoning Commission, meeting jointly,
was held Tuesday, October 9, 1979 at 7:30 p.m. in the
Community Room of the Courthouse East, 723 5th. Avenue
East, Kalispell, Montana.
Members Present:
John P. Kain
Ray Lybeck
Dorothy Garvin
Fran 011endike
Ann Smith
Dale W. Haarr
W. J. Lupton
Others Present:
C"3) APO Staff Repr.
Steve Petrini
Jim Mohn & David Bohyer
Norb Donahue, City Attorney
Approx. 18 Guests
John Kain, Acting as Chairman, opened the,meeting at
7:35 p.m'. and advised that Chairman Wm. Lupton would
be late.
Acting Chairman,Kane called for additions or corrections
to the Minutes of 8-28-79 and 9-25-79. There being
none Fran O1lendike moved that the minutes be approved
as submitted; seconded by Dorothy Garvin. Question
called for, motion carried unanimously.
Jim Mohn briefly updated the Board on the Anderson_
Subdivision proposal and explained thast it was 18
lots on 34+ Acres and the original map showed one lot
having a 20' road easement with 2 lots at the north
end with a road easement tying into a main road. Jim
stated that the two red lines indicated a portion of
the irrigation ditch and secondary drainage and found
out that the two lines need to be adjusted so actually
the drainage ditch is west of the property.
The Staff had recommended at the last meeting a
different design and actually recommended an increase
of lots, and at that meeting the Board recommended
that the Staff and Developer get together to come to
a mutual agreement as to how the property should be
divided. Following a couple of meetings, the Staff
agreed with the map shown on the left, which is
basically to change all lot lines to run from the road
to the exterior boundary of the property and recommended
that Lots 1 and 2, which was originally a portion of
the park be deleted all together, with its fate to
be determined at some later date. In lieu of the park
area, it was agreed on a 15' drainage easement along
the western boundary of the property to drain in line
with the subdivision requirements for surface drainage
along Ashley Creek and the number of lots is reduced
by three, 1 and 2 and what was originally 4. The road
into the project has been widened to a 60' but remain
private and the 2 required cul-de-sacs incorporated
and with the park removed altogether and that cash
in lieu of land agreement be signed with the
Commissioners and that value is approximately $3,000
in this case. Jim stated that with these amendments',
the Staff has recommended approval with two conditions:
1. that the water and sewer systems be approved by
the State and. County Sanitarian, 2. and that the war
systems provide necessary facilities for tanker rechutge
and 3. that all deeds carry a waiver of right to
,protest annexation to the City of Kalispell.
Based on the action this Board took on Ashley Hill
Subdivision a half mile south of this, this is then
compatible.
Questioned was the geographical location and was advised
it was almost 4 miles west`of Kalispell, indicated.
West Valley and indicated where Three Mile Drive tied
in about 600' north.
Acting Chairman Kane called for proponents, being none,
he asked for opponents. Being none then turned the
hearing over to the Board for comments. Fran Qllendike
questioned whether the developers had concurred with
all the changes and was advised that they had agreed
and said that they had one request and that being that
in the submission'of the final plat that they be able
to change the Anderson Subdivision to a more appropriate
name. Had wanted to call it Ashley but there was
already one called that the previous meeting.
Ann Smith moved .that the Board accept the proposal
as presented; Dorothy Garvin seconded the motion. 0
Question called for, motion carried.
Letter; 8-28-79
Steve Potrini read a letter from Douglas R. Johns to
from Doug Johns
the Kalispell Planning Board, dated August 28, 1979
Tabled till later
and stated this was the first opportunity of placing
in Mtg.
this on the Board's Agenda. (copy attached).
Steve explained that there was to be some discussion
later on in the meeting if the Board wished to postpone
this discussion. John Kain stated that a definite
meeting or hearing needed to be set. Ann Smith wished
to know whether there was a hearing. Steve said no,
because as a part of the Redevelopment Plan there would
be no hearing by the Planning Board. Similar to the
Plan itself, a review, recommendation to the Council,
who then hold a hearing and amend the Redevelopment
Plan to include the zoning. Ann Smith wished to know
what the area was recommended for now, with regard
to these three,particular lots? Steve stated, NC-2
Neighborhood Commercial -Professional Offices. Ann
said similar to B-2 in other zoning and wished to know
what B-5 was? Steve stated the old B-5 was Central
Business District Zone under the old ordinance, similar
to the C-4 in the Redevelopment area, primarily retail
core. He is asking for B-5, all retail stores, etc.0
Ann Smith wished to know if this could be taken up
with the Redevelopment portion of the Agenda later.
I
ZONE CHANGE REQ.
John C. & Donna
Darling:
Lots 1 & 2 Blk 1
Greenacres Zoning
Dist., from R-2 to
B-1.
(1704 Woodlawn
Ave.,Kalispell.)
(Mrs. Darling
, Verbally Withdrew
Her Zone Change
Request).
It was agreed that would be best.
Fran 011endike moved that it be tabled until later
on the the evening; seconded by Dale Haarr: motion
carried.
Acting Chairman Kane opened the public hearing on the
Darling Zone Change Request and Steve Petrini stated
that the Staff had mailed out maps and information
regarding the change to all Board Members. Steve
proceeded to indicate the location of the -proposal
and stated that it was within the R-2 Greenacres Zoning
District. The request was for B-1 to install a beauty
shop. Steve stated that the Staff had attempted to
discourage the request relating it to spot zoning based
on the County Attorney's opinion on Spot Zoning, since
everything around the property is zoned residential.
Since this is not on the fringe of a district, but
surrounded. Mrs. Darling still wished to pursue the
matter and she is here.
Mrs. Darling said she had no comment to make as it
had been all explained.
Steve stated that in the way of an example was
Aemisegger's zone change request in the West Evergreen
District, whereby there was a misunderstanding on behalf
of the Board of County Commissioners, and a furniture
store was to be installed on the site, the site became
the location of a two story building, half of which
was to be occupied by the furniture and the upstairs
to be occupied by four different offices, and half
of the downstairs by three other retail outlets and
the Commissioners felt that he had more or less promised
to build a furniture store but that does not hold true
and if a zone is changed then anything that falls within!
that zone can be placed on that property. j
Steve stated that although Mrs. Darling was requesting
a B-1 for a beauty shop, that the B-1 district allows
gas stations, grocery stores, package liquer and a
lot of other. This should be kept in perspective in
when reviewing this.
Gentleman came forward with a petition with signatures.
Steve stated that he had received a call indicating
that a gentleman was bringing in a letter, and then
proceeded to read the letter, APO, Flathead County
Commissioners: Re: Req. by Darling Zoning Change.
"We respectfully urgently request that this zone change
be denied for the following reasons: Location of this
residence is very close to a heavily travelled but
narrow residential street and its possible use is one
of the number of allowable enterprises could and almost
certainly would create problems and hazards which have
J.
no business in residential area. For example, an outlet
for alcoholic beverages, or perhaps worse is not exactly
in harmony with this type of residential neighborhood.
At the present time there is no indication that the
Darlings intend to become permanent neighborhood
residents, so in changes in the nature of the business
use of this property looms as a very real possibility.
While changing zoning designation from residential
to commercial may increase the market value of the
property in the event of its being sold, a certain
decline in the quality of the surrounding neighborhood
in terms of family liveability is a very high price
to ask neighbors to pay. 2. the already existing
traffic hazard at the intersection of Woodlawn and
Willow Glen Drive is notorious. This establishment
offers the possibility now and in the future of
compounding the already bad situation. 3. zoning
is the only available method of maintaining reasonable
order and land use and to be effective it simply must
apply equally in the zoned area. Before the area was
zoned, small residential businesses were established,
mostly having to do with the art business and
fortunately so far they have had little or no adverse
effect on the neighborhood. It must be remembered
however, that these are very different type of retail
business allowed under the B-1 Neighborhood Business
classification. It is a wise precaution never to push
one's luck especially when some small push can have
such far reaching implications. We appreciate you
attention and consideration, respectfully, William
Jasper, Celeste Jasper, Mr. & Mrs. Charles Hash, G.
M. Dougherty, Ruby W. Dougherty, Mr. and Mrs. Dale
W. Campbell."
Mrs. Darling wondered if the rest were her neighbors
as Mrs. Dougherty was. Steve said, no Hash and didn't
believe Jasper was directly her neighbor either. Mrs.
Darling said she was sorry, she had no idea they were
going to protest. Did talk to them previously and
they did say it was fine, and thank the Board for their
time and consideration.
Gentleman said he was Mr. Dougherty and he lived
adjacent to the Darling property, live on the corner
where Woodland insects Willow Glen Drive. Now Mrs.
Darling came to them and asked if they had any objection
to her putting in a beauty parlor, a one chair, because
she wanted to make some money to help support her Mother
who is sick, so they told her that was fine, but had
no idea it was going to change zoning of the residential
district. Further they get a letter that it would
have to be zoned to B-1 before she could put in her
beauty parlor, and if they had known as stated that
it would require a change from a residential district,
they would not have agreed to this but didn't know
this. Wanted to state that the people who live along,
Woodland and Willow Glen Drive have paved for the paving
Chgs. Proposed
in Kalispell Planning
Area Compr. Develop.
Plan:
i
of that street, from the corner of Willow across the
draw along [willow down to Devons Corners. The resident:
paid for that oiling and job and did this so wouldn't
be obligated to anybody so they could change the zoning
and we want that to be a residential district. Seems
to him, why would it be necessary to change the zoning
couldn't there be a variance given to this lady to
Mrs. Darling to have her beauty shop? If not, if it
has to be rezoning, against it. Rest of the neighbors,
3 who couldn't be there are against the zoning, Gray
Miller, Mr. and Mrs. Rubin Nelson and they live on
the corner too.
This residential district also paid for city water
and sewer and everything so should have a little to
say whether it stays residential or goes different.
Questioned was whether there was anyway that she could
be accommodated with a temporary permit, because the
landowners are very sympathetic with her, but don't
want the zoning changed.
Acting Chairman Kane said there was nothing the Board
could do about the thing, outside the City Limits,
so the Zoning Commission can't act upon it and nothing
the Board can do to accommodate Mrs. Darling. Felt
Mrs. Darling was right when she withdrew a few minutes
ago, her request.
At this moment Acting Chairman Kane asked to turn the
meeting over to Chairman Lupton.
Steve asked if Mrs. Darling had withdrawn her request
and the landowners & Board said she did.
Steve advised that the Flathead County Board of Adjust-
ment would not be able to do anything for her.
Steve explained that based on the Board's discussions
at their Sept. 11, 1979 meeting, certain motions were
made which required changes in the Comprehensive Plan
for the Kalispell Area. The changes are cross checked
on the attached Public Hearing notice. Steve gave
a description of the locations. Steve stated that
the existing Comp. Plan for the Fairgrounds area, that
is owned by the County, is currently now what he called
high density urban or multi -family and the proposed
change is to bring it into compliance. This is a result
of a discussion the Board had about zoning pockets
of the County that are inside the City. So all these
areas along with a couple others are looking at the
possibility of zoning so this would bring the Fairground
area totally into a Public category. West of Two Mile
from Urban Residential Single Family into High Density
Urban which is Multi -Family. On Sunnyview and 93 from
Urban Residential to High Density Urban category to
urban category. The property which is east of the
Hospital and owned by the Hospital, and also the lower
part which is owned by the City from Urban Residential
to Public and one additional one, is west of the Vall
View Apartments, Liberty St., proposed request for
annexation. Jim will review as never discussed.
This would also require a Plan change if it goes as
proposed, currently in urban residential and would
need high density urban residential in order to comply
with the Plan.
These are all Comp. Plan Changes.
Ann Smith felt that on the high density urban that
subsequently they moved 300' in with a B-1 on Meridian.
Steve said the Board did but just changing the Plan.
Ann Smith questioned whether this was discussed in
Council Chambers. Garvin stated leaving the extra
territorial alone. Steve said the zoning was subject
to any necessary Plan changes.
Jim Mohn said Dale Collins was proposing a 36 unit
apartment complex on just under 3 acres of land, which
is in excess of 11 units per acre and therefore does
need a Plan change from urban density to high density
urban for multi -family before he can proceed with the
project. Does have annexation request scheduled for
next regular meeting. One lot annexation and not a -�
public hearing but in order to expedite that action
a Plan change should be considered to simplify the
annexation procedures. Does propose to extend Liberty
Street approximately 250' with a 60' r/w and the rest
of the map outlines the concept. He is making
application to the Board of Adjustment for a Conditional
Use permit also and should have some word on that before
the next meeting.
This was in accordance with the new Ordinance.
Chairman Lupton wished to know if the Board had any
comments on any of these proposed changes.
Fran 0llend.ike said that basically everything except
this El Daorita had been discussed and it was just
a .matter of approving it.
Ann Smith moved to approval all the changes as presented
seconded by Dale Haarr: motion carried.
The Board discussed the zoning of B-1 and RA-1 west
of Meridian and B-1 was compatible in that high density
urban category.
Board discussed that area which belonged to the Hosp- 1
and the water and reservoir area.
Double LL was briefly discussed, with an update and
Redevelopment Plan
Discussion:
ja motion was made by Ann Smith; seconded by John Kane
to approve Double LL with the east 290' B-1, west 290'
RA-1 with the western most 20' r/w and the comment
was made that those recommendations had been agreed
upon by one of the two owners at a previous meeting.
Motion carried.
The Board then discussed the Board of Adjustment action
on the Sundown Drive -In facility and it was indicated
it was subject to conditions, ingress and egress,
landscaping and the Board could place conditions for
expansion on the project to be in compliance with the
Plan.
Steve then advised the Board that he had attended a
meeting involving the redevelopment area. He explained
that discussed was the business of two Ordinances and
not sure that Norb Donahue was convinced that he would
like to see two ordinances. If there is to be an
ordinance to go with the redevelopment plan then he
feels it ought to be a part of the plan itself. It
was written, the draft itself, was written just as
that, a part or the total plan for this particular
area, which is the centrral part of the city. It would
take a review by the Planning Board of the Ordinance
in the Districts boundary breakdown, a recommendation
by this Board to City Council and not sure how Norb
would handle it after that point. The City Council
under the Redevelopment and Urban Renewal Act, to hold
a public hearing on the Plan, prior to its adoption
by the Council. Might be that as a result of Ordinance
B. Norb would send it to the Zoning Commission, for
recommendation as well before public hearing by council
and then final adoption by them. It is being proposed
and he indicated that would be the way to do it., make
it an amendment to the redevelopment plan, Part II,
whatever you want to call it so that when it's adopted,
it would be an integral part of the Plan so when you
get a copy you get a copy of the land use proposal
as well as a zoning portion.
There was a discussion on administration and two
separate ordinances. Didn't think that the outcome
of the meeting would be more difficult really to
administer, still have to see if it complied with the
ordinance in either case than just a single ordinance.
Norb felt it ought to be a part of the Redevelopment
Plan itself and when the Council advertises for a
hearing they would advertise it as an amendment to
the Redevelopment Plan.
Steve said he didn't know if they wanted him to go
through and explain the districts again or not. Ann
Smith wished that the Lots which were in the Kalispell
Townsite (Doug Johns letter) were. Steve explained
there were two lots and one more where the Presbyterian
Church is. 150', real estates, part of a parking lot
for the Church and across the street and the funeral
9•
home.
Johns said his father owns two 25' lots (75' altogether.)
Directly south of PP&L, the new round real estate
office.
Kitty corner across the street from the Devonshire
Motel.
It was explained that the basis for Doug's request
was that in 1950 that property was rezoned as part
of the Central Business District and now this change
takes it out of the district and simply wants to retain
what it has been for nearly 20 years. During those
20 years been used car lot, used car sales office,
and for the last 15 years a real estate office. If
anything the area is more commercial now than then.
Compatible uses were sited. Discussed then were the
difference between the C-3 and -4. Works as a
compliment to the C-4. Steve then read the difference
between the two districts. Not as many permitted uses
in the C-3. Most of the business that are there are
going to be conforming uses. O'Neil Lumber will be
a non -conforming. Not a retailing district, basically
oriented to convenience, offices, motel -hotel, support
area.
Took a lot of uses out, combination of B-5. Concerned
that it isn't part of that Central Business District.,--`,
Would be a conforming use in either the C-3 or the
NC-2. In looking at the old ordinance there was no
reference to real estate office.
Steve explained there is no reference to Central
Business District in the Redevelopment Plan at all.
Breaking away from tradition.
Steve stated that if all these units banded together
they could consider themselves the Central Business
District. It was felt this was a magic term.
Steve explained that the mortuary is non -conforming.
Being discussed tonight is the expansion of a non-
conforming use, subject to conditions.
It was stated that the entire purpose of the rezoning
was to get. away from the jigsaw pattern over the entire
town and get some uniformity into it. It was felt
that there probably wouldn't be too much expansion
there, as there wasn't the room on the site.
In 1966, his Dad had obtained a variance on the
Executive Plaza, owned it before Triplett, owned it
before Triplett bought it. He obtained the variance
on the land across from the Motel for expansion on
that corner and had the signatures of everyone on tha`�__
!0V
block. Steve said that via a petition you can request
that certain areas be kept single family and that is
exactly principally the City Council said with the
Redevelopment, yest this will be, not necessarily single
family, but low density, residential.
John Kain wanted to know what was being done with the
Interlude, now turned into a gift store. A non-
conforming use.
It was advised it didn't matter, as either it will
be across the Street from C3, or across the alley from
a C-2. It was mentioned taking it down the alley.
When the KDC first made the presentations to the public,
were invited down on first Avenue East to discuss this
with about 70 residents of the area, and.what they
said loud and clear was they wanted to preserve their
residential area, as their has been an encroachment
of the business in that area, and advised, that they
were not policy making but would have to go to the
planning board, and sessions after that, what they
wanted was to come down on First Avenue East and Nest
and keep it low density, single family, but then agreed
to low density so you're asking if line changes are
permissible. With that in mind they signed a petition
with over 250 signatures and part of the changes
addressed the neighborhood, as prescribed by law and.
being public servants, and this is what the Plan is
saying now, low density. That was to protect the
integrity. They did ask for that type of recognition.
John Kain felt that any type of zone change would only
cause problems.
Dave Bohyer stated he remembered seeing the names on
the petition, and didn't know whether this had ever
been presented to the Board, indicating, "cast 'hereto
is a list of property owners on Main Street of Kalispell
Montana, between Fifth Street East and West and 8th.
St. East and West and Lots located in B1k 85, 86, 96,
105, 106, Kalispell Original. The signatures on the
attached list indicate that the property owner thereof
does not object to the rezoning of the subject property
as shown on the preliminary zoning map to the zoning
category of B-2 Neighborhood Professional Business".
Doug's name is signed on this. Questioned was the
date? Just have a copy, don't see one. These are
the people who Live in the homes, that live in
residential areas. Dave excused himself. It was felt
that anyone who wanted to live next to the downtown
area should be able to. His property is set next to
that and the other person has the flexibility but the
one next to it can't change or grow as the growth
spreads. The parcel we are involved in most likely
will be an office building but there will be concern
so long as it is maintained as residential. The office
building probably won't be limited to the NC-2 uses.
G
Steve questioned what would fit, and was advised he
didn't know what they were going to put in there at
this time. There is no retail allowed in that zone
and most office buildings have jewelry or children
stores on the first and second floor and then have
offices above, a small retail specialty shop downstairs
and office up. Steve stated this would not be permitted.
sand there is off-street parking to be considered.
Chairman Lupton looked for Board comments.
Fran 011endike suggested that Dan and Max Lauder meet
and hash it out and decide what they want to do with
the fringes of the neighborhood. Steve stated this
does not effect the Main Street areas. Concerned with
maintaining and limiting activities that take place
on the side streets. They were not objecting to the
NC district which was principally office, looking more
toward a low rise complex that would not be incompatible
with the neighborhood.
John Kain said nothing was set in concrete. Like to
see it go as it is as there will be changes and the
total area can be worked out for the benefit of the
owners, residential or business. John Kain stated
that this has been more or less concurred with by the
Council. Ann Smith wondered whether the Board of
Adjustment would have a hand in this, advised no.
Ann Smith felt that action should be taken. Chairman
Lupton looked to the Board for additional comments.
Ray Lybeck indicated he would have to leave and was
requested to stay for the voting.
Dale Haarr felt that all that was necessary was time
to determine additional needs and people and their
attitudes would. change and would be in favor of getting
it approved as presented and see the changes down the
road and this could be the first one after it is all
out together. Felt it shouldn't be necessary to go
back to public hearings or jeopardize it by not taking
action.
Ann Smith had a motion but the second was with drawn
so was requested to restate the motion. Ann Smith
move that the Board accept the Kalispell Downtown
Redevelopment Plan as presented by Mr. Petrini and
make a recommendation to the City Council; seconded
by Dale Haarr. Question called for, motion carried.
Chr. Lupton explained that the City Council had already
adopted the plan, they now needed to act upon the zoning
Questioned was the time frame, and Ann Smith did not
believe it would be next Monday night, perhaps in Nov.
AV a
and Mr. sallagher will have to be involved somewhere.
along the line.
Ray Lybeck finally left the meeting.
Discussion of
Ann Smith would like the Board to consider extra -
Extra -territorial
territorial zoning on Hwy 93 north of Kalispell, area
zoning for Hwy 93
Tfrom Sunnyview Lane to 4 Mile Drive. Would like this
from Sunnyview
considered at the earliest possible date.
Lane to 4 Mile
Like the Planning Board to request the City Council
to consider the extra -territorial zoning, with a change
and then discussed the general area. Wants the Board.
to make a recommendation to the City.
Ann Smith said she would like to discuss it and gets
the feelings. Chr. Lupton said there was a lot of
feedback in not wanting high density. Ann Smith said
the City Council met today and there will be a amendment
to the Kalispell City County Planning Board
recommendation to take out one area of high density
urban. Steve would have to draw up a plan showing
what the proposed zoning would be and he understands
what that is. Steve indicated it would be wise. Fran
011endike felt it should be recommended to the City
Council do something. Ann Smith said Dan Johns
questioned the City Council on their ability to impose
extra territorial zoning as it related to the county
property. Kane wanted to know what Norb's response
was. Ann said he questioned the question.
Chr. Lupton said hopefully to take action at this level
to pass the recommendation on to the City Council.
Fran 011endike felt she should request this of the
Staff. Ann Smith asked Steve to present this. Dan
Johns stated that after Norb looked at the statute
he didn't think they could do it. Need to look at
it some more. Would get together with him.
Being no additional business, the meeting adjourned
at 9:25 p.m.
John Kane, Acting Chr., & W7 J.Lupton, Chr.
lL9
11I0